Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—Petitioner in this writ petition has called upon the Court to answer the following question:

“Who is competent authority to declare a deed of transfer void under Section 166 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950?”

2. The brief facts giving rise to the above question would suffice the purpose.

3. Petitioner purchased the land in question vide sale-deed dated 1.1.1988. It appears that the Naib Tehsildar submitted a report that the aforesaid sale-deed is hit by Section 157-A of the Act. The report was accepted by the Assistant Collector First Class vide order dated 25.3.2010 and an order vesting the land in the Gaon Sabha was passed. The aforesaid order was challenged by the petitioner by means of an appeal before the Additional Commissioner - I, Chitrakoot Dham Division, Banda. The appeal has been allowed vide order dated 27.8.2010 and the matter has been remanded to the Collector for decision afresh. Petitioner moved application for modification of the above remand order contending that the competent authority to decide the matter is Assistant Collector First Class and, therefore, the remand to the Collector is not proper and requires modification. The application has been rejected vide order dated 4.11.2011.

4. It is in the above background that the present writ petition has been filed raising the above question.

5. Section 166 of the Act provides that transfer made in contravention of the provisions of the Act shall be void. The consequences of void transaction have been enumerated under Section 167 of the Act and it is provided that the land covered by such transaction would vest in the State Government and that Collector would be entitle to take possession of the same. The Act, however, does not contain any provision as to the authority competent to declare any transfer to be void under Section 166 of the Act.

6. Ordinarily, there is no necessity for getting any transaction to be declared void. The party asserting the transaction to be void can establish it in proceedings in which reliance upon such a transfer is being placed and even in collateral proceedings.

7. Section 331 of the Act provides for the Courts which are competent to take cognizance of any suit, application or proceedings. It provides that Courts mentioned in column 4 of the Schedule II of the Act shall be the competent Court to take cognizance of any suit, application or proceedings based upon cause of action specified in Column 3 of Schedule II of the Act. Item No. 15 of Schedule II provides that proceedings under Section 167 of the Act read with Sections 201 or 202(a) of the Act for the ejectment of a transferee of a Bhumidhar with non transferable rights or Asami shall lie before the Assistant Collector First Class. Ejectment of a transferee of a bhumidhar or an Asami is also a consequence of a void transfer. The aforesaid provision though does not specifically provides that the Assistant Collector First Class is competent to declare the transfer void under Section 166 of the Act but when he has been conferred with the power to make a consequential order of eviction of the transferee, it means that in such eviction proceedings he is also competent to declare the transaction to be void and thereafter to order for eviction.

8. In this view of the matter, Assistant Collector First Class appears to have both the powers of declaring a transfer to be void and to order eviction of the transferee.

9. In this connection my attention has also been drawn to Rule 151 of the Rules framed under the Act. The aforesaid Rules provide that it shall be the duty of the Lekhpal to report to the Assistant Collector First Class through the Tehsildar, all cases of transfers made in contravention of the provisions of Sections 154 and 157-A of the Act, whereupon Assistant Collector First Class is enjoined upon to obtain information, make enquiry and to issue a show-cause notice to the person concerned and after hearing the parties to pass necessary o