Shyamshankar Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 18529 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47795
 
Court No. - 18
 

 
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 619 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Shyamshankar Shukla
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Shankar Padey,Shesh Nath Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Heard.

Present petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 11.07.2023, passed by the opposite party No.2 in transfer application No.450/2023 under rule 65(2) of U.P. C.H. Rules, relating to village Mawaiya, Pargana Asal Tehsil and District Amethi, Shyamshankar Shukla vs. Asha Devi and Others as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition in the interest of justice.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opp. parties concerned for transfer of appeal no. 859/ 28.02.2023 of 2023 (Shyam Shankar vs. Asha Devi and Others) from the Court of opp. party No.3 to any other court of same jurisdiction of any other district in the interest of justice."

The main ground to get the case i.e. Appeal No.859 (Shyam Shankar Shukla vs. Asha Devi & Others) for transfer from the Court of Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Prayagraj as also assailing the impugned order dated 11.07.2023 passed by the opposite party No.2-Additional Director Consolidation (Administration), Lucknow, as appears from the record, is to the effect that the authority concerned namely Settlement Officer of Consolidation is under influence of private respondents. The application filed under Rule 65(2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954 seeking transfer has been rejected after observing the allegations are not genuine.

It is settled principal of law that merely suspicion by the party that he will not get justice would not justify transfer. There must be a reasonable apprehension to that effect. A judicial order made by a Judge legitimately cannot be made foundation for a transfer of case. Mere presumption of possible apprehension should not and ought not be the basis of transfer of any case from one case to another. It is only in very special circumstances, when such grounds are taken, the Court must find reasons exist to transfer a case, not otherwise. Reference can be made to the judgment dated 12.11.2014 passed in Transfer Application (Civil) No. 519 of 2014 (Amit Agarwal vs. Atul Gupta).

Considering the facts of the case, as pleaded, in the light of settled principle of law on the issue, this Court is of the view that the allegations against the Presiding Officer are bald and vague and being so this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present matter.

Accordingly, present petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 21.7.2023/Vinay/-