JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - These references have been made by the Addl. Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly vide his recommendation dated 1.2.1990 under Section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 in a proceeding under Section 198 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. 2. In brief the facts of the cases are that the allotment of the revisionists were challenged before the Addl. Collector. They contested the proceeding but the leases were cancelled vide his order dated 29.4.1988. Revision has been filed against that order of the trial court. The learned Addl. Commissioner has recommended that there has been no show cause notice issued properly in the proceeding, hence the order of the trial court is illegal and it should be set aside. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the record. 4. There has been no issue of show cause notice at all under Section 198 (5) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. In view of the law laid down by a Full Bench of the Board of Revenue in which I was also a member it is mandatory to issue show cause notice Section 198 (5) before the cancellation of the lease. After the issue of the notice the parties should be given opportunity to disprove or prove the lease only then the allotment can be cancelled. In these circumstances of the case I agree with the recommendation of the learned Addl., Commissioner and set aside the order of the trial court date 29.4.1988 and remand the case to it to try the proceeding afresh in accordance with the observations made above then to decide the cases. This order shall govern reference No.222 to 224 of 1990-91/Shahjahanpur.