S. U. KHAN, J. ( 1 ) THE dispute in the instant writ petition relates to two sets of agricultural plots. First set consists of plots 69,73,74/2,79/1,80/1,82 and 83 (area 3 bigha 3 biswa ). The second set consists of plot nos. 45, 47, 69 and 72 (area 3 bigha 12 biswa ). After start of consolidation proceedings in the village where plots in dispute are situate petitioner filed two sets of objections, copies of which are Annexures 11 and 12 to the writ petition. Annexure-11 related to the first set of plots and annexure-12 related to second set of plots. In the objections in respect of first set of plots it was stated that Chairman Gaon Sabha on 10. 6. 1962 allotted the said plots to Noor Vikram Shah and petitioner was in possession over the said plots since long. In the said objections it was also stated that petitioner was in possession since before Zamindari abolition by virtue of power of attorney executed by Noor Vikram Shah. In the objections in respect of second set of plots it was stated that the said plots were allotted to the petitioner by the Chairman of Gaon Sabha on 10. 6. 1961 (or 1962) to the petitioner and that he was also in possession of the said plots since before Zamindari abolition. ( 2 ) BEFORE Consolidation officer copy of a document purported to be an Ijazatnama executed on behalf of the previous Zamindar in favour of the petitioner bearing date 15. 7. 1938 was also filed. ( 3 ) CONSOLIDATION Officer, Bijnore by order dated 18. 12. 1973 dismissed the objections which had been registered as case No. 1164 of 1973, Against the said order appeal was filed which was dismissed by A. S. O. C. on 19. 10. 1974. Thereafter petitioner filed revision under Section 48 of u. P. C. H. Act being revision No. 2416. Assistant Director of Consolidation, Lucknow camp-Bijnore by order dated 8. 10. 1974 dismissed the revision hence this writ petition. ( 4 ) CONSOLIDATION Officer as well as A. D. D. C. have given detailed reasons for not believing the ijazatnama such as the paper is not old, the name of petitioner, was not recorded in the revenue records after Ijazatnama, compliance of conditions of permission have been written on the ijazatnama while it ought to be in the records of Zamindar. In my opinion no reliance can be placed upon the said Ijazatnama for the simple reason that it was not pleaded in the objections. Absolutely nothing was said in the objections regarding the said Ijazatnama. ( 5 ) NO relief can be granted to the petitioner in respect of plots of the first set as the alleged power of attorney by Noor Vikram Shaw to whom plots were allotted was not filed. Petitioner did not file objections on behalf of Noor Vikram Shaw. He filed objections on his own behalf claiming his own right over the land. Power of attorney even if executed could not confer independent right and title upon the petitioner. ( 6 ) HOWEVER, the courts below have held the allotment of plots of second set in favour of the petitioner to be illegal and irregular on the ground that list of deserving candidates was not prepared, munadi was not done and agenda was not circulated before allotment by Gaon Sabha. It was also mentioned in respect of said ground that it was not shown that in the village no person belonging to preferential category of persons deserving allotment like ex-serviceman etc. was available. All these ground render the allotment irregular or illegal but not void. These grounds render the allotment/patta voidable and not void. On these grounds patta can be cancelled only under proceedings under Section 198 (4) of U. P. Z. A. andl. R. Act. Consolidation authorities cannot cancel patta on these grounds. Consolidation authorities can ignore the patta only if it is void. If the allotted land did not vest in State and Gaon Sabha then the patta is void and it can be ignored by consolidation authorities (vide U. P. State Sugar Corporation v. D. D. C. A. I. R. 2000 S. C. 878 paragraphs 43 to 46 ). ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, writ petition is allowed in part. Impugned orders in respect of plots of first set are affirmed. Impugned orders in respect of plots of second set i. e. plot Nos. 45,47,69 and 72 are set aside. It is directed that petitioners name shall be entered over the plots of second set as bhomidhar with transferable right. . .