HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 11874 of 2025 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Mr. Javed Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Hari Mohan Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Dhirendra Patel as well as Mr. Yadvendra Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no.4. 2. The instant transfer application has been filed for the following relief : "(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to transfer the case No.60 of 2025 (Shyam Kumar Garg Vs. Chand Malik) under section 21 (1) (Ka), (Kha) Urban Rent Recovery and Eviction Act from Additional District Magistrate (Rent Authority), Hapur to any equalent authority and also direct the respondent no.3 not to proceed any further case against the petitioner till the disposal of the aforesaid case. (II) Issue such other and further writ order or direction as this Hon'le Court may deem, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case protecting the interest of the petitioner. (III) Award cost of the writ petition against the contesting respondents. " 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that proceeding of case under Section 21(1)(ka)(kha) of UP Act No.16 of 2021 is pending before the Rent Authority, Hapur. He submitted that rent authority is not proceeding in proper manner, as such, the proceeding of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Javed Alam Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Dhirendra Patel, Yadvendra Yadav Shyam Kumar Garg .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) aforementioned case should be transferred before any other authority of the same district. He submitted that reasonable apprehension has arose in the mind of the applicant that he will not get justice from the court of Additional District Magistrate, Hapur/Rent Authority, Hapur, as such pending proceeding should be transferred. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4 submitted that in order to linger on the proceeding, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner. He submitted that there is no ground to transfer the proceeding from the court concerned to any other court. He further submitted that transfer application filed before the District Judge has been rejected vide order dated 07.07.2025, as such, the prayer in the instant petition cannot be allowed. 5. Mr. Hari Mohan Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submitted that the instructions have been received from the Additional District Magistrate, Hapur, who has mentioned in his instruction that ground taken for transfer of the pending proceeding is false, but he has no objection if the pending proceeding is transferred from his court to any other court. 6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. There is no dispute about the fact that proceeding under Section 21(1)(ka)(kha) of the UP Act No.16 of 2021 initiated at the instance of petitioner is pending before the Additional District Magistrate, Hapur/Rent Authority. 8. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, the perusal of the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the District Judge, Hapur rejecting the transfer application filed by the applicant will be relevant for perusal, which is as under : "न्यायालय- जनपद न्यायाधीश, हापुड। िसिवल स्थानांतरण प्रा० पत्र संख्या िनल सन् 2025 WRIA No. 11874 of 2025 2 श्याम कु मार गगर् बनाम उ० प्र०सरकार आिद 07/07/25 आज यह स्थानांतरण प्राथर्ना पत्र प्रस्तुत हुआ। प्राथीर् के िवद्वान अिधवक्ता को पौषणीयता के िबन्दु पर सुना। प्राथीर् की ओर से प्राथर्नापत्र इस आशय का प्रस्तुत िकया गया है िक न्यायालय िनयत प्रािधकारी / अपर िजलािधकारी हापुड़ के यहां लंिबत बेदखली व िकराया वसूली के वाद को िकसी अन्य न्यायालय में स्थानान्तिरत करने की याचना की गयी है। सुना तथा पत्रावली का पिरशीलन िकया। प्राथीर् द्वारा न्यायालय िनयत प्रािधकारी/अपर िजलािधकारी िवत्तीय/राजस्व हापुड़ वाद संख्या 60 सन् 2025 श्याम कु मार बनाम चांद मिलक अन्तगर्त धारा 21 (1) (क) (ख) उ०प्र० नगरीय िकरायेदारी िविनयम अिधिनयम 2021 में लंिबत वाद को अन्य सक्षम न्यायालय में सुनवाई हेतु स्थानान्तिरत िकये जाने की प्राथर्ना की गयी है। प्राथीर् व िवपक्षी को यह स्वीकार है िक प्रस्तुत िववािदत वाद न्यायालय अपर िजलािधकारी / सक्षम अिधकारी हापुड़ के न्यायालय से लंिबत है। धारा 24 िसिवल प्रिक्रया संिहता 1908 में यह प्रावधान िकया गया है िक िजला न्यायालय िकसी वाद, अपील व अन्य कायर्वाही को अपने अधीनस्थ िकसी न्यायालय में िवचारण के िलए अन्तिरत कर सकता है परन्तु प्रश्नगत वाद िनयत प्रािधकारी/अपर िजलािधकारी िवत्तीय/राजस्व हापुड़ के न्यायालय में लंिबत है, िजसके संबंध में स्थानान्तिरत करने का कोई क्षेत्रािधकार िजला न्यायालय को नहीं है। प्राथीर् द्वारा प्रस्तुत स्थानान्तरण प्राथर्नापत्र िविधक रूप से पोषणीय न होने के कारण िनरस्त िकये जाने योग्य है। आदेश प्राथीर् का स्थानान्तरण प्राथर्नापत्र िविधक रूप से पोषणीय न होने के कारण िनरस्त िकया जाता है। पत्रावली बाद आवश्यक कायर्वाही िनयमानुसार दफ्तर दािखल हो। प्रभारी िजला जज, WRIA No. 11874 of 2025 3 हापुड़। 7.7.2025" 9. I also perused the transfer application filed by the applicant before the District Judge as well as the averment made in the instant writ petition and perusal of the aforementioned document demonstrate that there is no ground to transfer the pending proceedings from the court of Additional District Magistrate, Hapur/rent authority to any other rent authority. 10. No case for interference is made out in this matter. 11. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. September 18, 2025 Priya WRIA No. 11874 of 2025 4 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad