IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that transfer orders must respect the principles of natural justice, ensuring both parties are heard before any decision is made.

JUDGMENT :

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) :

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners to set-aside the impugned order dated 10.02.2023 passed by Chairman, Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Dehradun/respondent no. 3 in Transfer Application No. RN 461/BoR/2022-23 (Annexure No. 6), whereby the Chairman, Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Dehradun has ex-parte allowed the transfer application of the respondent nos.1 and 2 and called the entire record of the Revision No. 01 of 2022-23 pending before the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Circuit Court Nainital to the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand , Dehradun for its adjudication.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners filed the Revision No.60 of 2022 in the court of Kumaun Commissioner, Nainital along with delay condonation application and stay application; that, notices were issued to the respondent nos.1 and 2 in the said revision; that, the learned Commissioner, Kumaun Division, vide its order dated 06.07.2022, allowed the delay condonation application; that, being aggrieved, respondent nos.1 and 2 filed a revision being Revision No.01/2022 before the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Circuit Court, Nainital; that in the revision filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2, notices were issued to the petitioners whereupon the petitioners put their appearance through their counsel and the revision was proceeded for hearing.

3. He would further submit that meanwhile, on 10.02.2023, respondent nos.1 and 2 filed a transfer application before the Chairman, Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Dehradun with a prayer to transfer the Revision no.01/2022 from the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand, Circuit Bench Nainital to Board of Revenue at Dehradun; that, the Chairman, Board of Revenue Uttarakhand, Dehradun, by the impugned order dated 10.02.2023, allowed the transfer application; that, pursuant to the impugned order, the entire record of Revision No.01 of 2022 filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 has been transferred to the Board of Revenue, Dehradun.

4. Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Chairman, Board of Revenue Uttarakhand, thereby transferring the revision from Circuit Bench, Nainital to Board of Revenue, Dehradun is illegal and erroneous as the same has been passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners; that, the transfer application was allowed by the Chairman, Board of Revenue on the same day when it was presented i.e. on 10.02.2023 without issuing any notice to the petitioners; that, even no specific order was passed by the Chairman, Board of Revenue on the transfer application and only an endorsement of single word “allowed” was made on the transfer application.

5. He would further submit that the land in dispute is situated at Village Bandran Basnal, Tehsil Salt, District Almora and all the parties are permanent resident of Tehsil Salt District Almora which belongs to Kumaun Division and thus as per the structure of Board of Revenue Uttarakhand, only Circuit Court Nainital has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate the said revision filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 and furthermore it would be much convenient for the parties to approach the Circuit Court Nainital for disposal of revision.

6. Learned senior counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2 would submit that since the day the revision was filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 before the Board of Revenue, Circuit Bench Nainital the advocates working in the Circuit Bench, Nainital, under the influence of opposite party, were expressing their inability to contest the case on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2; that, in such circumstances respondent nos.1 and 2 were left with no other option except to file transfer application.

7. He would further submit that if the court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the Chairman, Board of Revenue is not justified and the revision should be decided by B