JUDGMENT I.B. Singh, Member - This a reference dated 14-10-1981 made by learned Additional Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi, recommending to allow the revision application and to set aside order dated 4-10-79 passed by Tahsildar Maudaha/Assistant Collector, 1st Class, district Hamirpur ordering exchange of plot No. 70-A, 3 bigha 10 biswa 16 biswansi and 70-B, area 7 bigha 18 biswa of the applicant with equal area of plot No. 520-M area 11 Bigha 1 Navin Parti of Gaon Sabha. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 3. It has been argued that no previous permission of the Collector as required by Section 28-C of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act was obtained as the applicant is a Lekhpal in the village of the Lekhpal of this village and is son of Pradhan Mahadeo, that no compliance of rule 110-A(21 was made, therefore, the recommendation should be accepted. 4. It has been argued in reply that the permission of the S.D.O. was obtained then the exchange was allowed, that the order of the learned additional Commissioner is highly vitiated as these facts were not considered. 5. Section 28-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act runs as follows :- "28-C. (1) No member office bearer of a Gaon Panchayat or Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti shall otherwise than with the permission in writing of the Collector knowingly acquire or attempt to acquire or stipulate for or agree to receive or continue to have himself or through a partner or otherwise any share or interest in any licence, lease, sale, exchange, contract or employment with, by or on behalf of the Samiti concerned : Provided that a person shall not be deemed to acquire or continue to have or stipulate for or agree to receive any share or interest in any contract or employment by reason only of his.- (a) having acquired any interest before he became a member or office-bearer ; (b) having a share in a joint stock company which makes the contract ; and (c) having a share or interest in the occasional sale through the Samiti concerned of an article in which he regularly trades up a value not exceeding Rs. 50 in any one year. (2) No Court or authority shall enforce at the instance of any person, a claim based upon a transaction in contravention of the provision of sub section (1)." 6. 50 in any one year. (2) No Court or authority shall enforce at the instance of any person, a claim based upon a transaction in contravention of the provision of sub section (1)." 6. The power of the Collector u/s 28-C of the Panchayat Raj Act for granting previous permission for obtaining Gaon Sabha's lands either by patta or by exchange has not been delegated to any other subordinate authority namely S.D.O. etc. Schedule 3 of the Panchayat Raj Act, therefore, that power is not exercisable by any other authority except by the Collector of District. 7. The power of the Collector under Section 27 (3) of the U.P. C.H. Act for correction of map read with his powers u/s 38 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act after Notification u/s 52 of the U.P. C.H. Act has been held not to be exercisable by any subordinate authority per Suraj Narain and others v. Bhawani Prasad and others, 1977 R.D. 234 five Members Full Bench of the Board of Revenue, thereby doing away with the decision of Brij Mohan v. Ram Dularey, 1972 R.D. 176 decided by Full Bench of 3 Members of the Board of Revenue, that proceeding u/s 28 of Land Revenue Act was not a judicial proceeding declaring amendment of Para 911 of the Revenue Manual declaring proceeding u/s 28 of the Land Revenue Act to be non-judicial proceeding and the amendment of para 911 being against the provisions of the Act itself, as such proceeding has been held by the larger Full Bench (Supra) to be judicial proceeding. 8. The power enjoyed by the State Government under U.P. Panchayat Raj Act by Section 95(l)(b) and Section 96-A empowers delegation of such powers to S.D.O. and Additional S.D.O. by Notification No. 4483-P/XXXIII-50-57 dated December 19, 1958. In case (sic) directed by State Government or Collector to exercise such powers and to deal with the cases arising under U.P. Panchayat Raj Act regarding removal of Members of the Panchayat etc. but there is no provision for delegation of power by the Collector regarding his power to be used u/s 28-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. 9. In case (sic) directed by State Government or Collector to exercise such powers and to deal with the cases arising under U.P. Panchayat Raj Act regarding removal of Members of the Panchayat etc. but there is no provision for delegation of power by the Collector regarding his power to be used u/s 28-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. 9. It has been held in Ram Autar v. Nathu Ram, 1975 R.D. 43 that if Pradhan and the L.M.C. wanted to execute patta in favour of the Pradhan's sons and nephews it was obligatory to obtain Collector's written permission u/s 28(C) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. 10. The next crucial question for determination is whether Tahsildar/Assistant Collector 1st Class has got jurisdiction to grant permission of exchange u/s 161 of Act I of 1951 or not. 11. Tahsildar/Assistant Collector 1st Class has been authorised to use powers of Collector by Notifications only in the proceeding u/s 122-B and old Section 111-A and 187-A of the Act I of 1951 but has not been authorised by those Notifications to deal with cases mentioned in Schedule II of Act I of 1951, wherein Assistant Collector 1st Class has been authorised to deal with the cases mentioned at serial numbers ; that Assistant Collector 1st Class is appointed Assistant Collector 1st Class by the Government directly and not by any Government Notifications. The following Government Notifications authorising Tahsildar to act as Assistant Collector 1st class are relevant :- (1) Notification No. 3011/T-A-418-55 dated December 8, 1955. Published in U.P. Gazette Part I, dated December 17, 1955 empowered all Tahsildars (officiating) for an unbroken period of three years having powers of an Assistant Collector, first Class to discharge duties of a Collector under rule 115-C, in all the districts of U.P. except, Almora. Garhwal and Tehri-Garhwal. (2) Notification No. U.O. 733/1-A-375D-59 dated May 11, 1961, empowered all Tahsildars and Tahsildars (officiating) for an unbroken period of three years having powers of an Assistant collector First Class to discharge the duties of a Collector under Sections 187-A and 211-A of the Act. (3) Notification No. 3195/1A-3594-95, dated June 30, 1962 empowered all Tahsildars as stated above to discharge the function of a Collector under rules 113-C to 115-N. 12. (3) Notification No. 3195/1A-3594-95, dated June 30, 1962 empowered all Tahsildars as stated above to discharge the function of a Collector under rules 113-C to 115-N. 12. There is no Notification authorising Tahsildar with power of Assistant collector 1st Class by the above Notifications to deal with other cases than mentioned in the Notification including Section 161 of Act I of 1951 which power is vested on Assistant Collector 1st Class directly appointed by the State Government, therefore, in the instant case Tahsildar, Assistant Collector 1st Class who passed the order for exchange had no power to pass such order, therefore, his order was without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside. 13. As there was no previous permission in writing from the Collector of the district as required by Section 28(C) of the Panchayat Raj Act and as Tahsildar/Assistant Collector 1st Class has got no jurisdiction to grant permission of exchange u/s 161 of Act I of 1951, therefore, this revision application is liable to be allowed and the recommendation of the learned Additional Commissioner is accepted and the order passed by the Tahsildar/Assistant Collector 1st Class is liable to be set aside and the application for exchange is liable to be rejected. 14. In view of the above, the revision application is allowed. The order passed by the Collector 1st Class set aside, and the application for exchange is rejected.