JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This reference has been made by Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra vide his recommendation dated 20.8.1986 under Section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. 2. In brief the facts of this case are that Land Management committee, Ganeshpur Tahsil Khair, district Aligarh allotted plots nos. 202, 209 to the opposite party for abadi purposes. The revisionist Navnidh Prasad filed a cancellation proceeding under Rule 115-P of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Ruled. The Additional Collector decided the proceeding after taking the evidence of the parties in the court of Naib Tahsildar. Naib-Tahsildar was also examined in the court on oath. He came to the conclusion that plot no. 208 area 0-2-0 and 209 area 0-9-0 are recorded bhumidhari of the revisionist, hence allotment by the Land Management Committee of this area to the opposite party is nullity. He came to the conclusion that since. 18 area is recorded as Banjar, hence the allotment for that area is valid. Therefore, he dropped the proceeding, hence this revision was filed before the Additional Commissioner who has recommended the revision to be accepted. 3. I, heave heard the learned counsel for both the parties in detail. Perused the record. 4. The learned counsel for the revisionist was also heard on two dates. Since the plots no. 208 and 209 are recorded bhumidahri of the revisionist, hence the allotment made by the Land Management Committee is prima faice ultra vires. As regards the 0-0-18 area of plot no. 208 which is recorded Banjar in the Kata of the Gaon Sabha does not exist independently on the spot. It is also not clear as to which of the allottee has been allotted this area, therefore, this allotment cannot also exist. The Land Management Committee first got to declare demarcated this area well it can allot it if it belongs to Gaon Sabha. 5. On these observation of the legal position of the case I accept the reference and set aside the order of the trial court regarding the dismissal of the proceeding regarding whole area for which the proceeding was initiated and declared that the allotment was void for plot no. 208 area 0-2-0 and 209 area 0-2-0 and it is not definite where. 18 area of plot no. 208 area 0-2-0 and 209 area 0-2-0 and it is not definite where. 18 area of plot no. 208 exist and who was allotted that area, therefore, the allotment of this portion of the plot is also defective, hence it is cancelled and the revision is allowed accordingly.