S.K.SINGH, J. - (1.) HEARD Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel who appeared for the respondents.
(2.) PRESENT writ petition is directed against the orders passed by the Consolidation Commissioner respondent No. 1 dated 7 -5 - 1992 and 20 -5 -1992 (Annexure Nos. 6 and 8 respectively). It appears that appeal No. 455 Palak Dhari v. Devi Prasad, relating to village Azampur, Pargana Nizamabad, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgarh was pending before the Settlement Officer Consolidation of the District Azamgarh. In view of the facts as has been stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner it is clear that earlier on his application the appeal was transferred from one officer to another in the same District, which was confirmed up to this Court but thereafter on application for transfer having been moved by the respondents before the respondent No. 1 pending appeal was directed to be transferred from District Azamgarh to District Ghazipur. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of transferring the appeal from Azamgarh to Ghazipur by order dated 7 -6 -1992 was without any notice and opportunity to the petitioner and was behind his back, and therefore, the application for recall was moved which too was rejected by the respondent No. 1 by order dated 20 -5 -1992 without considering the contention of the petitioner solely on the ground that the matter has already been disposal of and the appeal is pending before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Ghazipur and, therefore, application is rejected. On a perusal of both the orders passed by the Consolidation Commissioner dated 7 -5 -2002 and 20 -5 -2002 (Annexure Nos. 6 and 8 respectively to the writ petition) this Court is of the view that the Consolidation Commissioner has exercised his jurisdiction in a most arbitrary and perfunctory manner. Needless to say that transfer of case from one Court to another and from one district to another cannot be said to be an administrative action decision and they being the judicial function the concerned authority has to examine the contention of the parties and by assigning cogent reason which are permissible under law orders are to be passed. Transfer of a case from one Court to other and to other district can only be directed when there are sufficient ground for same. Needless to say that transfer of a case from a Court reflects on the officer from where case is transferred. Order dated 1 -5 -2002 states that pending appeal from District Azamgarh is being transferred to Ghazipur on administrative ground. Learned Commissioner appears to be under the impression that he is passing the order of transfer of an officer and he do not appear to be conscious of the fact that he is transferring the appeal which is to be judicially dealt. In view of the further submission of the learned Counsel that the order dated 7 -5 -2002 was passed behind his back it is clear that both the orders of the respondent No. 1 are arbitrary and illegal.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Orders of the Consolidation Commissioner dated 7 -5 -1992 and 20 -5 - 1992 are quashed. It is directed that the matter will now be heard by the competent authority at Azamgarh. In this respect it will be open for either of the parties to move an application before the Deputy Director of Consolidation alongwith certified copy of this order upon which hearing of the appeal will be assigned to available official who will decide the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties without allowing any unwarranted adjournment to either of the parties. Petition allowed.;