Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42482 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6959 of 2025 Petitioner :- Siddarth Shankar Tiwari Respondent :- Additional Commissioner, Judicial, Ayodhya Zone, Ayodhya And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Karan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Raj Karan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2. In the light of proposed order, notice to private respondent no. 3 is dispensed with. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent no. 3 had moved an application for transfer of proceedings pending before the Tehsildar, Region - Fatehpur, District - Barabanki, being Case No. 1507 (Computerized Case No. T202404120309244 - Siddharth Shankar Tiwari Vs. Smt. Munni Devi and Others, under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 with regard to disputed land being Gata No. 106/0.2490 hectares, situated at Village - Lalapur, Pargana and Tehsil - Fatehpur, District - Barabanki. In the said application certain allegations have been levelled against Naib Tehsildar, due to which it was stated hat applicant does not have any faith in the independence of integrity of the Presiding Officer and prays for transfer of case to any other competent Court. 4. The Additional Commissioner, Ayhodhya Division, Ayodhya by means of order dated 03.05.2025, had issued notice to the opposite parties in the application therein and during pendency of the said application has directed the Court below not to pass any final order. It is against order dated 03.05.2025, that present writ petition has been filed. 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition stating that only notices have been issued to the petitioner, who would be at liberty to appear before the Additional Commissioner and file objections against application for transfer. Accordingly it is stated that there is no jurisdictional defect in the notice having been issued to the petitioner and in the aforesaid circumstances, present writ petition would not be maintainable. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. It is noticed that only against notice issued on 03.05.2025, present writ petition has been filed. An application was filed by respondent no. 3 under Section 212(2) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, once any such application is made, it is the duty of the Additional Commissioner to consider the grounds taken for transfer and in case he finds any substance in the said application he has discretion to transfer the proceedings to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. 8. It is also clear from the impugned order that only notices have been issued and objections have been sought from the petitioner. But the petitioner instead of filing objections, has approached this Court by filing present writ petition. 9. This Court is of the considered view that it is open for the petitioner to file objections in opposition to the application for transfer and the petitioner does not stand to be adversely effected in any manner by the order issuing notices to him on the application for transfer of proceedings. 10. Accordingly, this Court do not find the present matter to be a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As the order impugned is merely a notice requiring the petitioner to submit his response, the petitioner would be at liberty to take all the grounds at his command in opposition to the application for transfer before the Additional Commissioner. 11. Present writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. Order Date :- 24.7.2025/A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench