IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1099 of 2008 (M/S) Ganesh Ram S/o Sri Kunwar Ram R/o Village Ghuna Post Ratighat, Tehsil Koshyan Kutoli, District Nainital. ……...Petitioner. Versus 1. Shanti Devi W/o Lachhi Ram 2. Dhara Ballabh S/o Jait Ram 3. Pooran Ram S/o Hari Ram 4. Ramesh Ram S/o Hari Ram 5. Vipin Chadra S/o Pooran Ram All R/o Village Ghuna Post Ratighat, Tehsil Koshyan Kutoli District Nainital. ……….Respondents. Shri Pradeep Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By means of this writ petition, filed under Article 226 read with 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.06.2008 (annexed as annexure-5 to the writ petition), passed by Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal, Nainital, whereby said authority has transferred Case No. 52 of 2008, pending before Sub-Divisional Officer, Koshya Kutoli (District Nainital) to Sub Divisional Officer, Almora, on the application of respondent No. 1. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a case is pending before Sub-Divisional Officer, Koshya Kutoli, District Nainital, filed under Section 210 of Land Revenue Act, by the respondents- Shanti Devi and others. Objector wherein is Ganesh Ram (present petitioner). An application No. 11/2007-08, was moved by respondent No. 1, seeking transfer of the case from the court of Sub Divisional Officer, Koshya Kutoli to Sub-Divisional Officer, Almora on the ground that the son of the petitioner is practicing Advocate, at Nainital, and as such, the Presiding Officer, at Koshya Kutoli, District Nainital, can be got influenced by him. 5. I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that Commissioner Kumaun Division, before transferring the suit to Sub-Divisional Officer, Almora, should have issued notice to the petitioner. However, since the order has been passed in the interest of justice, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the allegations made by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order, passed in the interest of justice, particularly in view of the fact that there is no allegation of partiality against the Sub-Divisional Officer of Almora. 6. Therefore, with the observation, the writ petition is summarily dismissed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 07.07.2008 Sweta