JUDGMENT I.B. Singh, Member - This is a reference dated May 3, 1974, made by learned Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra, recommending to reject the revision application being incompetent against order dated October 10, 1972 passed by learned Collector Mainpuri in a proceeding under Section 198(2) of Act I of 1951 cancelling the Pattas granted to the applicant. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 3. It was argued that the Collector had no power to cancel the Pattas granted of ceiling land because U.P. Deposition of Ceiling and Land Holdings Act, 1960 is a complete Act and the Section 27(4) provides power of cancelling the Pattas granted under it of the Commissioner and the provisions of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 are not applicable. 4. It was argued in reply that the Patta granted to Abiharan Singh was cancelled and Dakhal was taken and the land had reverted to the original tenant and again it was brought under Ceiling Act. Khata and Patta was grated to Chhotey Lal for 5 years under the Patta to the applicant was wrongly granted by Tahsildar concealing the facts and was rightly cancelled by Collector; that no revision lies against that order under the Z.A. Act under Section 333. 5. The order of the Collector is under Section 198 of Act I of 1951, hence the revision is maintainable. The Pattas granted under the Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 can be cancelled only by the Commissioner as provided under Section 27(4) of that Act. Therefore, the order of the Collector was without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside, and the recommendation that the revision is incompetent cannot be accepted. The ruling in Vijai Singh v. State, 1973 R.D. 4. is not applicable to the present case which was a case of allotment of ceiling Land and the present is a case in which Pattas has been cancelled by the Collector invoking power of cancellation under Section 198 of Act I of 1951 which is not applicable to the ceiling land under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act of 1960. 6. In view of the above, the revision application is allowed. 6. In view of the above, the revision application is allowed. The order of the learned Collector Manipuri is set aside and the case is remanded to the court of Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra for deciding it afresh according to law.