Bar Association, Ghaziabad Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Judicature, Allahabad and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/462940
SubjectConstitution
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided OnFeb-06-2001
Case NumberC.M.W.P. Nos. 39175 of 2000
JudgeBinod Kumar Roy and ;D.R. Chaudhary, JJ.
Reported in2001(1)AWC877; (2001)2UPLBEC1116
ActsConstitution of India - Article 235
AppellantBar Association, Ghaziabad
RespondentRegistrar General, High Court of Judicature, Allahabad and Others
Appellant AdvocateY.K. Sinha, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateSunil Ambwani, Adv.
Excerpt:
constitution - supervisory power of high court - article 235 of constitution of india - transfer of unheard pending cases to district session judge of gautam budh nagar from district courts of ghaziabad and bulandshahr by high court questioned - held, high court holds supervisory authority to control district courts by virtue of article 235 and transfer of case justified. - binod kumar roy and d. r. chaudhary, jj.1. the bar association, ghaziabad, has come up with a prayer to quash the following communication made by the registrar general of the court to the district judge, ghaziabad/bulandshahr vide letter no. 9875/admin. (9-3) allahabad dated 22.7.2000 as contained in annexure-1, which reads thus :'sub : transfer of pending cases pertaining to territorial jurisdiction of gautam budh nagar from the district court, ghaziabad and bulandshahr to gautam budh nagar. 'i am directed to say that the matter regarding transfer of pending cases pertaining to territorial jurisdiction of gautam budh nagar from district court, ghaziabad and bulandshahr to gautam budh nagar district wasconsidered by the court and after consideration, the court has been pleased to observe that except part heard cases pertaining to the district gautam budh nagar, the other pending cases relating to the district in the court at ghaziabad and bulandshahr be transferred to district and sessions judge, gautam budh nagar, for making over to respective courts. necessary steps in the matter be taken according. no. 9876/ admn. (a-3) dated alld. july 22. 2000.'2. a division bench of this court of which one of us (d. r. chaudhary, j.) was a party in civil misc. writ petition no. 37680 of 2000 challenging a similar direction issued to district judge, bulandshahr, dismissed on 1.11.2000 had occasion to consider similar issues raised herein and answered in the negative.3. having heard sri murli dhar, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and sri sudhir agarwal appearing on behalf of the court and following the reasons mentioned in the judgment dated 1.11.2000 aforesaid coupled with the constitutional power of supervision and control of this court over the courts subordinate to it vested under article 235 of the constitution of india, we dismiss this writ petition but without cost.
Judgment:

Binod Kumar Roy and D. R. Chaudhary, JJ.

1. The Bar Association, Ghaziabad, has come up with a prayer to quash the following communication made by the Registrar General of the Court to the District Judge, Ghaziabad/Bulandshahr vide letter No. 9875/Admin. (9-3) Allahabad dated 22.7.2000 as contained in Annexure-1, which reads thus :

'Sub : Transfer of pending cases pertaining to territorial jurisdiction of Gautam Budh Nagar from the District Court, Ghaziabad and Bulandshahr to Gautam Budh Nagar.

'I am directed to say that the matter regarding transfer of pending cases pertaining to territorial jurisdiction of Gautam Budh Nagar from District Court, Ghaziabad and Bulandshahr to Gautam Budh Nagar District wasconsidered by the Court and after consideration, the Court has been pleased to observe that except part heard cases pertaining to the district Gautam Budh Nagar, the other pending cases relating to the district in the Court at Ghaziabad and Bulandshahr be transferred to District and Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar, for making over to respective Courts.

Necessary steps in the matter be taken according. No. 9876/ Admn. (A-3) dated Alld. July 22. 2000.'

2. A Division Bench of this Court of which one of us (D. R. Chaudhary, J.) was a party in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37680 of 2000 challenging a similar direction issued to District Judge, Bulandshahr, dismissed on 1.11.2000 had occasion to consider similar issues raised herein and answered in the negative.

3. Having heard Sri Murli Dhar, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Sudhir Agarwal appearing on behalf of the Court and following the reasons mentioned in the judgment dated 1.11.2000 aforesaid coupled with the Constitutional power of supervision and control of this Court over the Courts subordinate to it vested under Article 235 of the Constitution of India, we dismiss this writ petition but without cost.