GAYA PRASAD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE HAMIRPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHISHIR Kumar, J. I have heard Sri Anil Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders dated 29. 1. 1985 and 2. 7. 1985 passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (Annexures 1 and 2 respectively ).

(3.) IN spite of the aforesaid fact, the Appellate Authority wife its order dated 2. 7. 1985 has rejected the appeal filed to the petitioner without recording a finding regarding the fact that whether the notice was ever served after filing an objection to the petitioner or not. A specific ground was taken before the Appellate Authority that the notice was issued by the Prescribed Authority sitting at Rath but the Prescribed Authority sitting at Kulpahar has decided the objection of the peti tioner. The Appellate Authority has recorded a finding that it appears that no order of transfer on record was there. The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected only on the ground that the order has been signed by the Prescribed Authority mentioning is as Rath/kulpahar Therefore, it will be presumed that the order has been passed by the authority sitting at Rath.