Allahabad High Court
Ramashraya Tiwari vs Board Of Revenue,U.P. Lko. Thru. ... on 29 March, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 231 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ramashraya Tiwari
Respondent :- Board Of Revenue,U.P. Lko. Thru. Chairman And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Chandra Sahu
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Krishna Singh, learned counsel for the State/respondent No. 1/Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow.
The present petition has been preferred seeking following main reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 6.12.2022 passed by the opposite party No. 1 contained as Annexure No. 1 to this petition.
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus for transferring the case/second appeal No. SA/1963/2022 District Deoria entitled Smt Kaushalya Devi versus Ramashraya and others from the Court of opposite party No. 2 Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh Yadav (member Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow) to some other court except court of opposite party No. 1.
(iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No. 3 not to disturb in peaceful possession of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned order."
Broadly the ground, as appears from paragraph 4 to 6 of the affidavit filed in support of application seeking transfer of the case, in issue, is to the effect that the Authority concerned is under influence of the appellant in second appeal, as such, the petitioner would not get fair and impartial justice in the case. Paragraph 4 to 6 of the affidavit filed in support of application seeking transfer of the case are quoted hereunder for ready reference:-
"4- ;g fd ekuuh; lnL; Jh lat; dqekj flag ;kno
miftykf/kdkjh lyseiqj ftyk nsofj;k esa fnukad 11-8-2000 ls 6-7-2001 rd lyseiqj esa jg pqds gSa tgka bl dsl dk Vªk;y voj U;k;ky; miftykf/kdkjh lyseiqj ds ;gka gqvk gS ogka bl f}rh; vihy esa vihykfFkZuh Jherh dkS'kY;k nsoh iRuh jkeukFk ;kno ds tks odhy ;kno th Fks mudk vHkh Hkh lat; dqekj flag ;kno ds ;gka vkuk tkuk gS rFkk ?kfu"B laca/k gSA ;gh ugha ijxukf/kdkjh lyseiqj ds :i esa Jh lat; dqekj flag ;kno th dk dk;Zdky cgqr gh pkSdkus okyk jgk gSA os dV~Vj tkfroknh gS ftlds pyrs lyseiqj rglhy esa djhc 3 ekg rd budks gVkus ds fy, gM+rky jgk gSA rc tkdj 'kklu }kjk budk ogka ls VªkalQj gqvk FkkA
5- ;g fd mDr okn esa ,slh fLFkfr dk tc irk py jgk gS fd Jh lat; dqekj ;kno th ,d dV~Vj oknh tkfroknh lksp ds O;fDr gS rFkk vihykfFkZuh Hkh ;kno gS rFkk lyseiqj vihykfFkZuh ds odhy Jh ;kno th dk lat; dqekj flag ;kno th ls ?kfu"B laca/k gS izkFkhZ dks vk'kadk gS fd buls orZeku dksVZ ls lgh U;k; ugha fey ik;sxkA
6- ;g fd mDr okn esa fuxjkuhdrkZ ¼foi{kh la0 2 }kjk xkao esa dgrs gq, lquk x;k fd ek0 lnL; egksn; ls ckr gks x;h gS fu.kZ; gekjs i{k esa gksxk rFkk lnL; egksn; esjh fcjknjh ds gSa ,slh fLFkfr esa ek0 lnL; egksn; ls U;k; feyus dh mEehn ugha gSA ftlds dkj.k izkFkhZ dks vikj {kfr mBkuh iM+sxh ftldh iwfrZ ugha dk tk ldrh gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa okn dk LFkkukUrj.k fdlh vU; U;k;ky; esa fd;k tk; ftlls izkFkhZ dks U;k; fey ldsA"
It is settled principal of law that mere 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 aforesaid facts in the light of settled principal of law on the issue, this Court is of the view that the order impugned dated 06.12.2022 is just and proper, as such, no interference is required in the present petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.3.2023
Arun/-
