- (1.) RAN Vijai Singh, J. This writ pe tition has been filed against the order dated 18. 6. 2008 passed by District Deputy Direc tor of Consolidation, Sonbhadra on the transfer application of the petitioner.
(2.) IT appears that three revisions were pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation in which dates have been fixed on number of occasions and argu ments were heard but the judgment was not delivered. In the meantime transfer application was filed on the allegations that on one date the petitioner has seen the re spondent alongwith some outsiders in the chamber of Deputy Director of Consolida tion and the Deputy Director of Consolida tion was assuring them that the revisions be allowed in their favour. IT appears from the perusal of the order that District Dep uty Director of Consolidation before whom the transfer application was filed without obtaining the personal comment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation with re gard to the personal allegations made in the affidavit has rejected the petitioner's transfer application. Sri R. N. Upadhaya, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that personal allegation could only be re butted by the Deputy Director of Consoli dation and that has not been done there fore, allegations which were made on affi davit could have been accepted as it were. Apart from this the impugned order has been challenged on number of grounds but the Court is not intending to discuss all these details here as Sri Triveni Shanker, learned Counsel who has put in appear ance on behalf of contesting respondent has submitted before the Court that the peti tioner is trying to delay the proceeding and is not interested in disposal of the revision. He has further submitted that he has no objection, if the impugned order is set aside and the case is transferred to some other district. He has made this statement after getting instruction from Sri Radhey Shyam, his client who is present before the Court and identified by Sri Triveni Shanker. In view this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 18. 6. 2008 passed by District Deputy Direc tor of Consolidation is quashed and with the consent of learned Counsel for the par ties the case is transferred to Deputy Direc tor of Consolidation, Allahabad. The Deputy Director of Consoli dation, Sonbhadra is directed to transmit the file of the Revisions No. 124, 125 and 126 of 2006 to Deputy Director of Consoli dation, Allahabad within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(3.) THE parties may appear before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Alla habad on 3rd September, 2008 and the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Alla habad shall decide the revisions expeditiously preferably within a period of three months. It is observed that no unnecessary adjournments be given to the learned Counsel for the parties. In case the parties avoid to participate the hearing the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Allahabad is at liberty to proved with the matter ex-parte. Learned Counsel for the petitioner apprehends that in the meantime Deputy Director of Sonbhadra shall decide the re visions therefore proceeding be stayed. His apprehension is misconceived as after the receipt of this order the Deputy Director of Sonbhadra will not proceed with the matter and will send the file through proper chan nel to Deputy Director of Consolidation, Allahabad. Petition Allowed. .;