1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.2647/2010 Omprakash Donuji Lanjewar and another Vs. The Collector, Bhandara and another. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. S. Borkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Thakre, AGP for respondents 1, 2 and 5 Mr. M.I. Dhatrak, Advocate for respondent no.3. Mr. S.V. Bhutada, Advocate for respondent no.4. CORAM: B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE :25TH AUGUST, 2010. 1] Heard finally with consent. 2] Challenge is to the order dated 20th March, 2010 passed by Additional Commissioner, Nagpur transferring the appeal before it to the Collector, Gondia. Advocate Borkar points out that on 26th February, 2010 itself the petitioner had pointed out to the Additional Commissioner his inability to consider the appeal but that objection was rejected and interim stay was granted in favour of respondent no.4. His contention is respondent no.4 had already ceased to occupy the office and because of that interim order, he was reinstated. When the appeal was placed for final hearing, the objection so overruled was accepted and the matter has been transferred to the Collector, Gondia. His next contention is that the Collector, Bhandara is the officer, who had passed the order impugned in the appeal before the Additional Commissioner and said Officer is of rank 2 equal with that of the Collector, Gondia. Therefore, the Collector, Gondia, cannot hear the appeal. He has, therefore, requested the Court to pass appropriate order to see that the appeal is decided on merits at the earliest by any other competent authority. 3] Advocate Bhutada has denied all the contentions. He points out that order dated 7th March 2009 passed by the Additional Collector in his capacity as Collector Bhandara was not pointed that on 26.2.2010 and hence Additional Commissioner proceeded further with consideration of appeal but when that order was pointed to the Additional Commissioner, the impugned order of transfer has been passed. 4] Advocate Dhatrak for respondent no.3 states that this Court may pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5] A.G.P. Thakre supports the impugned order. 6] After hearing the respective counsel, it is apparent that respondent no.4, who has used the earlier order dated 7th March 2009, on 20.3.2010 did not point out that order on 26.2.2010 when he obtained interim order. At the stage of final hearing that order dated 7th March 2009 has been used by him to prolong benefit of interim order. 3 7] Facts above clearly show that the Additional Commissioner could not have granted any interim relief and was not competent to touch the appeal. In any case, transfer to Collector Gondia being transfer to officer of equal rank as that of officer passing impugned order is unsustainable. 8] In the circumstances, with consent of the parties and after hearing the learned AGP proceedings in Appeal No. 1/2009-10 on the file of Additional Commissioner and Regional Director, Municipal Administration, Nagpur Region, Nagpur are transferred and placed on file of Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur. The said authority shall give due priority in the matter in view of the allegations and counter allegations being made. The appeal shall be heard as early as possible and in any case within a period of six weeks from the date the parties appear before the Divisional Commissioner. The parties shall appear before the Divisional Commissioner on 2nd September, 2010 and abide by his further directions in the matter. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. JUDGE Ambulkar.