IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL AO NO. 181 OF 2006 Subhash Chandra ……Appellant. Versus Ram Prasad Dhiman and another. ….Respondents. Present : Mr.Piyush Garg, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. P.C. Maulekhi, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Date of Order: 27.9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Head learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 2. This appeal from order has been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 against an order passed by the Assistant Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffarnagar, where the alleged accident also took place at Muzaffarnagar. However, since the workman was residing at Roorkee in the cost title the district was mentioned as Haridwar. 3. Not satisfied with the order of the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffarnagar, this appeal was filed by the appellant before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad prior to the appointed day i.e. prior to November 9, 2000. After the creation of the new State of Uttarakhand, the matter has been transferred to this Court under Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000. Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 reads as follows: “35. Transfer of proceedings from Allahabad High Court to Uttaranchal High Court.—(1) Except as hereinafter provided, the High Court at Allahabad shall, as from the appointed day, have no jurisdiction in respect of the transferred territory. (2) Such proceedings pending in the High Court at Allahabad immediately before the appointed day as are certified, whether before or after that day, by the Chief Justice of that High Court, having regard to the place of accrual of the cause of action and other circumstances, to be proceedings which ought to be heard and decided by the High Court of Uttaranchal shall, as soon as may be after such certification, be transferred to the High Court of Uttaranchal. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2) of this section or in Section 28, but save as hereinafter 2 provided, the High Court at Allahabad shall have, and the High Court of Uttaranchal shall not have, jurisdiction to entertain, hear and dispose of appeals, applications for leave to the Supreme Court, applications for review and other proceedings where any such proceedings seek any relief in respect of any order passed by the High Court at Allahabad before the appointed day: Provided that if after any such proceedings have been entertained by the High Court at Allahabad, it appears to the Chief Justice of that High Court that they ought to be transferred to the High Court of Uttaranchal, he shall order that they shall be so transferred, and such proceedings shall thereupon be transferred accordingly. (4) Any order made by the High Court at Allahabad— (a) before the appointed day, in any proceedings transferred to the High Court of Uttaranchal by virtue of sub-section (2), or (b) in any proceedings with respect to which the High Court at Allahabad retains jurisdiction by virtue of sub-section (3), shall for all purposes have effect, not only as an order of the High Court at Allahabad, but also as an order made by the High Court of Uttaranchal.” 4. This Court is of the considered view that not only the cause of action lies with the State of U.P. but the jurisdiction vests with the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad to decide the instant Appeal inasmuch as not only the accident had occurred in the territory of Uttar Pradesh, but the matter was decided by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffarnagar, which is in the territory of U.P. Furthermore, any order passed has to be executed by the Court at Muzaffarnagar. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that no cognizance can be taken by this Court in the present matter. 5. The Registry is therefore directed to transfer this case to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 27.9.2010 Rathour