JUDGMENT H.N. Agarwal, Member. - This is a reference made by Sri Ashwini Kumar, Commissioner, Allahabad Division, recommending that the revision filed by Sri Rati Lal against the order dated July 2, 1970 passed by the Tahsildar, Sardar district Kanpur in proceedings under Sec. 122-B of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act may be rejected. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records. On the basis of the report of the Lekhpal notice in Z.A. Form 49-Ka was issued to Satya Narain and Ram Lal on the ground that they had trespassed over plot No. 403, 407 and 402. The notice required the persons concerned to appear in the court of the Tahsildar on June 30, 1970. On June 30, 1970, however, they failed to appear, and the learned Tahsildar passed the order ejecting them on July 30, 1970. Thereafter, the present revision has been filed by Rati Lal, son of Satya Narain on September 16, 1971. The learned Commissioner has held that the present revision was time barred and was liable to be rejected. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the revisionist was that the revision was not time barred as the High Court has held in recent decision in Civil Miscellaneous Writ No. 2908 of 1977 decided on March 21, 1978 that limitation for filing a revision is three years. In view of this ruling the revision was within time. 4. In accordance with the ruling of the Hon'ble High Court, I am unable to accept the recommendation of the learned Commissioner. The reference is returned to the learned Commissioner with the direction that he shall proceed to hear the revision on merits and thereafter, make his own recommendations to the Board of Revenue.