JUDGMENT P. Singh, Member - This reference has been made by the learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut for setting aside the trial courts order dated 21-6-80 and for remanding the case for a fresh decision in accordance with law. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and have perused the record. None has appeared for the opposite parties to contest the reference. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Khacheru and Munshi moved an application under Rule 115-P of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Rules for cancellation of allotments made in favour of Deshraj and others in respect of the land in dispute on the ground that lease holders were not eligible for allotments, and that no proclamation was done or agenda circulated as required by the rules. The allottee's filed objection that the land was acquired for Harijan Abadi and allotments were validly done. The trial court rejected the application by its order dated 21-6-80. 4. In the objection filed on behalf of the opposite party it has been stated that the order of the Asstt. Collector under sub-section (4) subject to the provisions of sub-section (6) becomes final under sub-section (7) of Section 122-C and the provisions of Section 333 shall not apply in relation thereto. 4. In the objection filed on behalf of the opposite party it has been stated that the order of the Asstt. Collector under sub-section (4) subject to the provisions of sub-section (6) becomes final under sub-section (7) of Section 122-C and the provisions of Section 333 shall not apply in relation thereto. In this context the provisions of Section 122-C of the U. P. Act I of 1951 would be relevant and this section reads as under :- "122-C (1) The Assistant Collector incharge of the sub-division of his own motion or on the resolution of the Land-Management Committee, may earmark any of the following classes of land for the provision of abadi sites for the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and agricultural labourers and village artisans - (a) Lands referred to in clause (1) of sub-section (1) of Section 117 and vested in the Gaon Sabha under that section ; (b) land coming into possession of the Land Management Committee under Section 194 or under any other provisions of this Act ; (c) any other land which is deemed to be or becomes vacant under Section 13, Section 14, Section 163, Section 186 or Section 211 ; (d) Where the land earmarked for the extension of abadi and reserved as abadi site for Harijans under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, is considered by him to be insufficient, and land earmarked for other public purposes under that Act is available, then any part of the land so available." 5. According to the own case of the lease-holders - opposite parties, the plots in question had been acquired by the U. P. Government for purposes of allotments to the Scheduled castes. Scheduled tribes and agricultural labourers etc., that the possession of the plots was taken by the Government in accordance with law and documents to that effect were on the file, that thereafter allotments were made to the suitable Applicants in accordance with rules by the Land Management Committee and the said allotments were approved by the Sub-Divisional Officer. This would show that the land which was subject to allotments in the instant case was not covered by Section 122-C inasmuch it is said to have been acquired under provisions of Land Acquisition Act by the State Government for rural housing scheme. This would show that the land which was subject to allotments in the instant case was not covered by Section 122-C inasmuch it is said to have been acquired under provisions of Land Acquisition Act by the State Government for rural housing scheme. Thus, the finality attached to every order passed by the Assistant Collector under sub-section (4) subject to the provisions of sub-section (6) and every order of Collector under sub-section (6) would not apply to the instant case. It is also evident from the order of the learned additional Commissioner that allotments have been made in favour of persons other than scheduled castes and scheduled tribes which is never the intention of enactment of Section 122-C in the Act. Thus, the learned additional commissioner has rightly taken the view that validity or otherwise of lease granted in favour of opposite parties will have to be looked into in the present proceedings. Accordingly, the reference is accepted, the order dated 21-6-80 is set aside, and the case is remanded to the learned trial court for decision afresh in accordance with law, keeping in view the observations made by the learned additional commissioner.