ORDER C.S.P. Singh, J. - This is a petition by one of the tenure-holders of village Signone, Tahsil Mahoba district Hamirpur by which he challenges a plan of soil conservation prepared in respect of his village and holding under the U.P. Act No. XVI of 1963 (The U.P. Bhoomi Evam Jal Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 1963). 2. The Petitioner has raised a number of grounds in the petition including a challenge on the ground of vires of the Act. Inasmuch as it is possible to grant him relief without going into the question of vires of the statute, I refrain from considering the grounds raised in the petition in respect of this controversy. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has urged that there has been a breach of a number of provisions of the Act and the Rules and as such the plan cannot be enforced. Apart from the grievance about a breach of Section 10(3) of the Act, the contentions raised requires an investigation into facts inasmuch as there is a dispute about the correct factual position. As such it is not possible to decide this disputed question of fact in this petition. 4. So far as grievance of the breach of Section 10(3) of the Act is concerned, the same has been clearly made out. u/s 10(3), a copy of the draft plan prepared u/s 9 of the Act has to be sent to the Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti of the Khand in which the work is to be carried out. A special meeting has to be convened by the Samiti for the purposes of consideration of plan and the Samiti may thereafter file objection before the Bhoomi Sanrakshan Adhikari. Under Sub-section (6) of Section 10 of the Act, the Bhoomi Sanrakshan Adhikari has to hear the petition and submit his report on the objection to the Zila Samiti. The Zila Samiti after considering the objection and the report of the Bhoomi Sanrakshan Adhikari decides either to approve the plan with or without modification. As such it appears that before the acceptance of the plan, it is necessary that the plan be considered by the Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti of the Khand. In this case as would be shown the plan has not been sent to the Samiti nor has it been considered by it. The approval of the plan u/s 10(7) of the Act is as such vitiated. 5. In this case as would be shown the plan has not been sent to the Samiti nor has it been considered by it. The approval of the plan u/s 10(7) of the Act is as such vitiated. 5. Ajit Singh the Pradhan made an application to the Block Development Officer enquiring as to whether the draft plan had been received and also as to whether the Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti considered the same (see Annexure "B" to the petition). 6. The Block Pramukh wrote a letter on 15-11-68 forwarding the application of the Pradhan to the Block Development Officer and enquired from him as to whether the plan had been considered by the Khand Samiti or Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti and whether any resolution was passed in respect thereof. The Block Development Officer wrote a note dated 18-11-68 informing him that a meeting of the Samiti was held on 25-4-64 where 10 draft plans were considered but there is no mention in that meeting of the draft plan relating to village Signone. In paragraph 22 of the affidavit, the Petitioner has alleged that no copy of the draft plan was sent to Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti of Khand Jaitpur and was not also approved by it. This contention has been replied to in para 15 of the counter-affidavit where it has been stated that the draft plan was sent to the Block Development Oft jeer and the publication was done at Khand level. The correctness of Annexures "B" and "C-1" to the affidavit has not been denied. u/s 10(3), a draft plan has to be sent to the Krishi Evam Utpadan Samiti of the Khand and the mere fact that it was sent to the Block Development Officer would not satisfy the requirements of the section. This does not appear to have been done. Consequently, all action taken consequent to the approval have become defective, for there cannot be any approval of the scheme without complying with the procedure laid down u/s 10(3) of the Act. The petition as such deserves to be allowed. 7. I, therefore, issue a writ directing Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 not to execute any work in pursuance of the soil conservation plan prepared in respect of village Signone Tahsil Mahoba district Hamirpur in respect of the land of the Petitioner. The petition is allowed. The Petitioner shall be entitled to his costs.