JUDGMENT D.S. Misra, Member - This is a reference sent by the Addl. Commissioner, Allahabad vide his order dated 2-11-1974 passed by revision No. 214. 2. The facts giving rise to this reference are that one Chhedu moved an application before the Collector Fatehpur that the patta of plots No. 1240, 1241 and 1242 which was executed by L.M.C. in favour of Mahabir was not in accordance with the law and was liable to be cancelled. 3. The Collector took suo moto action in the matter and got enquiries made from his subordinate staff and rejected the application of Chhedu. Chhedddoo being aggrieved filed a revision before the Addl. Commissioner in which a reference was sent to the Board with the recommendation that the revision be dismissed, and against the said reference Chhedu had filed objection. 4. I have heard the ld. counsel for the applicant Chhedu. There is none present on the opposite side. I have also perused the impugned order and examined the records. 5. The ld. counsel for the applicant argued that the Collector did not at all consider the evidence in the case which was adduced on behalf of Chhedu and passed an order which was not in accordance with the weight of evidence on record. From perusal of the record I find that Chhedu had examined 4 witnesses including himself and had filed six documents in support of his claim. It is well proved therefrom that plots Nos. 1240, 1241 and 1242 were in his possession since 1319-F and as such was not a vacant land and therefore, the Gaon Sabha could not allot it to Mahabir. It is also evident from the very report of the subordinate staff that plot No. 1241 had a Pucca well and some trees which belonged to Chheddu and apart from it, it was being used as land of public utility for irrigation purposes and for affording drinking water to the cattle of the village. It was, therefore, just for the Collector that he ought to have cancelled the Patta in respect of these plots and thus committed illegality in rejecting the application. The ld. Addl. Commissioner has also not applied his mind to the above-noted facts and therefore, his recommendation for the rejecting the revision cannot be accepted. 6. It was, therefore, just for the Collector that he ought to have cancelled the Patta in respect of these plots and thus committed illegality in rejecting the application. The ld. Addl. Commissioner has also not applied his mind to the above-noted facts and therefore, his recommendation for the rejecting the revision cannot be accepted. 6. In the circumstances given above the reference in question is not accepted and the order of the Collector dated 7-5-1973 stands quashed.