IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.764 of 2009 AMRENDRA NARAYAN SAO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR For the Petitioner’s Advocate – Mr. Ashwani Kr. Singh, Senior Advocate Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Informant - Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Advocate For the State - Anant Pd. Singh. ----------- 3 21.05.2009 The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 7.4.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad whereby he recalled the Revision No. 14/209/05/2009 pending in the court of F.T.C.-II, Jehanabad and transferred it to the court of learned F.T.C.-I, Jehanabad. Learned counsel submits that the impugned order was passed without hearing the petitioner which is in violation of settle law. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied upon a decision report in the case of Raghu Raj Singh Rousha Vs. Shivam Sundarram Promoters Private Limited and Another reported in (2009) 2 SCC. 363. Learned counsel for the opposite party submits that he prays for expeditious disposal of the case. In view of the submissions made by counsel for the parties this case is being disposed of on a short point. I set aside the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad only on the ground that the same has been passed without hearing the other party. The matter is remitted back to the learned Sessions Judge for expeditious disposal of the matter after hearing both the parties. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. It would be open to the learned Sessions Judge to transfer the case to any appropriate court including - 2 - F.T.C. - I or F.T.C.- II or any other court as he thinks proper. This revision application is being disposed of on this limited point as the impugned order was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the other side. Let the order be communicated through FAX at the cost of the petitioner. Kundan (S. P. Singh, J.)