Bapna, J. - (1.) THIS is an application for transfer of a case pending in the Court of Shri Matadeen Sharma, first Class Magistrate Bhilwara under sec. 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
(2.) THE grounds for transfer are stated to be that one Shri Ramesh Chandra Vyas is an influential labour leader and is on friendly terms with the Magistrate. He had been attending the Court on almost all the dates of hearing not as a silent spectator but as an intruder and that he frequently makes suggestions to the learned Magistrate. In particular, on, the 8th of July 1952, he suggested to the Court to fix the case for the next day and undertook to get the summonses served on the accused on the very day. THE suggestion was accepted. It is contended that in view of the influence of Shri Ramesh Chandra Vyas on the Magistrate the accused do not expect a fair trial in his Court. This application was admitted in this Court on the 4th November and a copy of the affidavit was sent to the learned Magistrate for comments. No comments were received on the 25th November which was the date fixed. Whereupon an urgent reminder was issued and the reply was received on the 19th December which was the next date of hearing. It appears that some delay took place in receiving the Dak and therefore, the office note of 19th December is that the comments had not been received. Learned Government Advocate argued that the reply of the Magistrate showed that Shri Ramesh Chandra had no influence on the Magistrate and therefore no case had been made out for transfer. The first allegation in the petition is that Shri Ramesh Chandra Vyas was on friendly terms with the Magistrate. This fact is, however, not mentioned in the affidavit filed by the petitioners and since only the affidavit had been sent to the Magistrate for comments, no special denial by the Magistrate could perhaps be made. This allegation being unsupported is of no value. The next allegation is that Shri Ramesh Chandra Vyas had acted as an intruder in the proceedings of the Court and had been attending the Court on almost all the dates of hearing. This allegation is supported by the affidavit. The learned Magistrate has not specifically denied this allegation. He does not say that he does not know Mr. Vyas and is unable to say whether he does or does not attend the Court on every date of hearing. While he says that 9th July had been fixed at the request of the Public Prosecutor, he has not denied that Shri Ramesh Chandra Vyas had made a pressing request to the Court to fix 9th July for hearing. Again in his reply the Magistrate has gone out of his way to suggest that the accused had been following certain tactics in delaying the progress of the case and in that connection referred to certain revisions filed, not in this: Court, but in superior courts. In the circumstances it cannot be said that the accused have no reasonable grounds to believe that they will not receive justice at the hands of Mr. Matadeen Sharma. The application is allowed and the case is transferred from the Court of Shri Matadeen Sharma to the Court of Extra Magistrate at Chittor. .;