Dismissed¶10

Shankar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2023WRIC/38662/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court writ petition dismissed; challenge to Commissioner Moradabad's order dated 24.11.2022 rejecting transfer application under Section 212(2) U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; transfer of Case No. 1028 of 2021 (Shital Rani Vs. Kshtrapal) sought from Tehsildar Judicial, Amroha on allegation of assurance of favourable decision by the court; allegations against Presiding Officer held based on hypothesis; no sufficient material for transfer; single judge bench (Kshitij Shailendra, J.).

What did the court decide?

There is no good ground for quashing the order dated 24.11.2022 or for allowing the transfer application, as there is no sufficient material for granting the said prayers. ¶9

Shankar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38662 of 2022 Petitioner :- Shankar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Kumar Mishra,Arvind Srivastava

¶2

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Bhavesh Singh Jadaun, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1,2 and 3.

¶5

The prayer made in this petition is for quashing of the order dated 24.11.2022 passed by Respondent No.2, Commissioner Moradabad Division, Moradabad by which the transfer application of the petitioner was rejected in exercise of power vested under Section 212 (2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶6

This Court perused the order dated 24.11.2022 which shows that transfer of Case No. 1028 of 2021 (Shital Rani Vs. Kshtrapal) from the court of Tehsildar Judicial, Amroha to any other court was sought on the allegations that the opposite parties of the said case had made an announcement in the village that they had been assured by the court concerned regarding a decision in their favour.

¶7

The Commissioner has rejected the transfer application observing that the allegations levelled against the Presiding Officer concerned are based on hypothesis and, therefore, no ground for transfer was found.

¶8

It appears from the record that the Commissioner was satisfied that there is no sufficient material on record to accept the prayer for transfer and, therefore, he exercising his discretion not allowed the transfer for the said case.

¶9

This Court does not find any good ground for quashing the order dated 24.11.2022 or to allow the transfer application filed by the petitioner as there is no sufficient material for granting the said prayers.

¶10

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 8.2.2023 Kumar Manish.

¶12

Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shankar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yashpal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dayashankar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Raveesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others