JUDGMENT B. P. Jha, J. In an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for quashing Annexures 2, 3 and 4. Annexure 4 contains an order under section 12A (i) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Annexures 3 and 2 are the orders of the appellate as well as revisional authorities. In the present case, by Annexure 4. Ghak No. 224 of Mauza Angarichak, P. S. Karpi. district Gaya, has been allotted to respondent no. 4, Pargan Singh. 2. The grievance of the counsel of the petitioner is that the matter was decided without hearing the petitioner. In this connection he refers to section 12A(1) of the Act, which runs as follows :- “12A. Disposal of Objection, (1) All objections received by the Assistant Consolidation Officer shall, as soon as may be, after the expiry of the period specified in section 12 be submitted by him to the Consolidation Officer who shall dispose of the same, in the manner hereinafter laid down, after notice is given to the parties concerned and the Village Advisory Committee”. On a perusal of this section, it is clear that the objection under section 12A (1) shall be decided after issuing notice to the parties concerned and the village Advisory Committee. In my opinion, it is a mandatory provision. The allegation of the petitioner is that no notice under section 12A(1) of the Act, was ever given to the petitioner by the Consolidation Officer. There is no counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents to this allegation of the petitioner, Hence, in view of this infirmity, I quash Annexures 2, 3, and 4 so far as Chak No. 224 is concerned and remand the matter to the Consolidation Officer to proceed to hear the objection under section 12A(l) of the Act, after issuing notice to the petitioner and to other parties concerned and the vil1age Advisory Committee. These Annexures are, however, not quashed with regard to other Chaks. 3. In the result, the application is allowed, Annexures 2, 3 and 4 are quashed to the extent indicated above and the case is remanded to the Consolidation Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with law after bearing the objection under section 12A(1) of the Act, keeping in view the observations made above. 3. In the result, the application is allowed, Annexures 2, 3 and 4 are quashed to the extent indicated above and the case is remanded to the Consolidation Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with law after bearing the objection under section 12A(1) of the Act, keeping in view the observations made above. The parries shall bear their own costs. Chaudhary Sia Saran Sinha, J. I agree. Application allowed.