JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This reference has been made by the Additional Commissioner, Agra Division Agra vide his recommendation dated 20-8-86 under Section 333-A - of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 against the order of the Additional Collector, Etah dated 5-7-84 in which he has recommended that the proceeding which was decided by the Additional Collector was time barred. Hence the order of the trial court should be set aside and the allotment should be held to be valid. Objection was filed against this recommendation on the ground that the recommendation of the Additional Commissioner is against law and facts. 2. In brief the facts of the case is that the allotment in favour of Katori Devi was challenged by Prem Pal and Om Pal. The proceeding was contested by the allottes and a legal point was raised that regarding the same plot the Sub-Divisional Officer upheld the Patta to be valid on 5-8-72. Objection was also raised for the allotment order of 1967 dated 2-7-67, therefore, the cancellation before was under Section 198 (2) this Sub-divisional officer concerned, hence the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer will operate as res-judicata. The learned Additional Collector, Etah decided this point that the proceeding is not barred by principle or res-judicata on 5-7-84. The revision was filed against this order in which the above recommendation has been made by the Additional Commissioner. 3. I have been learned counsel for the revisionist Sri S.K. Singh Opposite parties not present. Perused the record. 4. The learned Additional Commissioner has taken a total different view and recommended that the proceeding was initiated in the court of Collector time barred. The period of limitation for cancellation was extended again for five years, therefore, the proceeding was not time bared, hence the reference is rejected. However, the trial court is directed that he should consider afresh whether a notice under Section 198 (5) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 is worth to be given to the opposite parties or not ? Because no lease can be cancelled now if the show cause notice under Section 198 (5) of U.P. Act. No. 1 was not given. After giving a notice if he is satisfied that there is prima facie case to cancel the leases then after taking the evidence of the parties he should dispose of the proceeding afresh.