JUDGMENT P. Singh, Member - This recommendation has been made by the learned Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra, vide his order dated 29-10-82. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on the application of Mool Chandra, proceedings under Rule 115-P of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules were initiated against Jai Kishan and Rustam Singh. It was alleged that the land allotted to Jai Kishan was in front of the house of the applicant-complainant, of which the applicant-complainant was in possession from before the abolition of Zamindari, and that prior to allotment no permission of the Sub-Divisional Officer was obtained. These averments were contested by Jai Kishan alleging that he was in possession over the land in dispute after the allotment. The trial court cancelled the allotment done in favour of Jai Kishan by its order dated 1-11-80. 3. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties, and perused the record. 4. The learned Additional Commissioner is of the view that no objections were raised in respect of plot no. 754/858. Only objection was raised in respect of plot no. 464-M. The learned Additional Commissioner is of the view that priorities indicated and to be recorded in Forms 49-O and 49-E were in respect of allotments to be made in favour of persons belonging to Scheduled caste and not to persons other than Scheduled caste to whom allotments are made under Rule 115-M. The learned counsel for the opposite party submits that the trial court gave a finding that the area allotted in plot no. 754/858 exceeded the limit of 250 Sq., Yds., as provided under Rule 115-O. This Rule 115-O reads as under : "115-O. The maximum area of allotment under Rule 115-L or 115-M shall not exceed 250 square metres and the allottee shall not be required to pay ground rent therefor: Provided that the limit of 250 metres shall not apply to cases of allotment of land for construction of a building for a charitable purpose or for setting up a cottage industry." I find that this finding of the trial court has not been considered by the learned Additional Commissioner. The allotment made in respect of plot no. 754/858 exceeded the prescribed limit of 250 Sq. metres, and as such this allotment cannot be held to be valid. Consequently, the allotment made in respect of plot no. 754/858 is to be cancelled. 5. The allotment made in respect of plot no. 754/858 exceeded the prescribed limit of 250 Sq. metres, and as such this allotment cannot be held to be valid. Consequently, the allotment made in respect of plot no. 754/858 is to be cancelled. 5. So far as plot no. 464 (area 200 Sq. Yds) is concerned, it is within the prescribed limits, and as such the allotment made in respect of this plot cannot be cancelled in view of the provisions contained in Rule 115-O of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules, and the allotment made in respect of this plot in favour of Jai Kishan cannot be cancelled. 6. Consequently, the revision is partly allowed, the allotment made in respect of plot no. 754/858 (area 20x25 Sq. Yds) to Rustam Singh is cancelled, and in respect of plot no. 464-M (area 10x20 Sq. Yds) done in favour of Jai Kishan is hereby confirmed. The impugned order of the learned trial court dated 1-11-80 shall stand modified accordingly.