JUDGMENT
S.N. Srivastava, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Counsel Caveator Opp. Party No. 2 as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the record also.
2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 6.5.2006 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition.
3. Learned Counsel for petitioners raised a number of arguments including that impugned order is without jurisdiction as it cannot be passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation. He further urged that there was no requirement of the Chak Marg after notification under Section 52 of the U.P.C.H. Act.
4. Learned Counsel for Opp. Party No. 2 urged that Chak Road was given to Opp. Party No. 2 in order to connect Kharanja Marg from his Chak.
5. In rejoinder learned Counsel for petitioners urged that Chak of Opp. Party No. 2 is still situated on existing Chak Road which connects the National Highway.
6. Considered arguments of learned Counsel for the parties and the materials on record and relevant provisions of law.
7. Section 52-A(1) of U.P.C.H. Act is being quoted below:
In case of a unit in relation to which a notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 52 has been issued before the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings (Amendment) Act, 1970, the Collector may, if he is of opinion that there exists no provision or inadequate provision of Chak Roads or Chak Guls in the unit and shall, if a representation in that behalf by not less than ten per cent of the total number of tenure-holders is made to him within six months of the said commencement, proceed to take action under Sub-section (2), anything to the contrary contained in Section 52 notwithstanding.
8. From perusal of materials on record, it transpires that notification under Section 52(1) of the U.P. C.H. Act was published on 7.7.2001 and on an application moved by Opp. Party No. 2 thereafter, the impugned order was passed providing Chak Road and Chak Nali.
9. This Court is of the view that under Section 52-A of the U.P.C.H. Act after notification under Section 52 of the U.P.C.H. Act, the Collector may, if he is of the opinion that there exists no provision or inadequate provision of Chak Roads or Chak Guls in the unit and shall, if a representation in that behalf by not less than ten per cent of the total number of tenure-holders is made to him within six months of the said commencement, proceed to take action under Sub-section (2), anything to the contrary contained in Section 52 notwithstanding. The impugned order was not passed by the Collector, but it was passed by the Additional District Magistrate/Deputy Director of Consolidation. The impugned order is without jurisdiction as orders could only be passed by the Collector of District if the conditions contained under Section 52-A(1) of the U.P.C.H. Act are fully satisfied.
10. Accordingly writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned order passed by the Additional District Magistrate/Deputy Director of Consolidation is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Collector, Ghazipur to be decided afresh in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. Parties are at liberty to raise all the questions of law and fact before the Collector, Ghazipur. 16.5.2006.