JUDGMENT A.U. Khan, Member - The facts are on 6.6.80 Lekhapl submits a report for ejectment in a proceeding under Section 122-B Z.A. and L.R. Act against Jang Bahadur. The complaint is that he is digging foundation for building a house over land: plot No. 88 area 10 decimal which is Gaon Sabhas but is in his unauthorised possession. On 7.6.80 a notice in Form 49-Ka is issued. A brief in opposition is filed by Jang Bahadur Singh on 24.7.80. The claim is that in consolidation an order was surely made to record the land as abadi. Also there are neem, mango trees old enough planted by him. That the land serves as an exit for his house and is in his rightful possession. Parties are given chance to lead their evidence. They have made their representation. On 15.1.81 Tahsildar enters an order of ejectment from the land. 2. Jang Bahadur Singh files a revision. On 15.10.85 Additional Commissioner submits a reference to set aside the order of Tahsildar dated 15.1.1981; to remand the proceedings for retrial in accordance with recommended proposal. The reference is docketed here for a definitive decision. 3. Heard the counsel for the revisionist and perused the record. 4. Khatauni 1385 to 1390 Fasli records plot No. 88 area 30 decimal as Navin Parti. The same vests in Gaon Sabha and Tahsildar had jurisdiction to pass the order that he has: 1975 R.D. 171, 1977 R.D. 195 and 1980 R.D. 206. 5. The counsel for the revisionist has argued all the points illustrated in the grounds of revision lodged in Commissioner's. Much has been, made of entry in Khasra 1387 Fasli which records plot No. 88 area 10 decimal as Abadi. There is need of some discrimination here. The record of area of 10 decimal out of 30 decimal as Abadi only means that the same is Abadi site, that is, vacant land in an Abadi. It is well to bear in mind that entry of Abadi in Khatauni is made for both positions (1) Abadi site or vacant land in Abadi (2) land in Abadi which is occupied by building or is appurtenant thereto. The vacant land in an Abadi vests in Gaon Sabha but the land in the Abadi site which is occupied by a building is the property of the owner thereof. The vacant land in an Abadi vests in Gaon Sabha but the land in the Abadi site which is occupied by a building is the property of the owner thereof. The meaning of this distinction has been mediated in 1980 R.D. 21. The evidence on record here bears out that an area of 10 decimal is vacant land in an Abadi. This is made so much clear in paragraph 3 of Jang Bahadur Singh's objection dated 24.7.80. He confesses that over the open space is the exit point of his house and has his Kolhu, Karha and the rest. It is sure that this is unauthorised appropriation by him of Gaon Sabha Land. So he is a rank trespasser over open space meant for Abadi of Gaon Sabha. Revenue court is competent to order demolition of structure in Abadi site, if found unauthorised and land vesting in Gaon Sabha, as here: 1980 ACJ 487. A bare reading of Section 122-B and Rules 115-D, E and F do bear out that the revenue court are competent to order demolition of unauthorised structure from Gaon Sabha Land: 1973 R.D. 255. When certain trees have been planted over Gaon Sabha land will not make him owner of the land. The trees are embedded in the earth and they shall become the property of the Gaon Sabha. 6. Additional Commissioner has suggested spot inspection as a ground for remand. The situation of various things ever the land in suit is not a subject of contest and needs no determination by spot inspection. So the basis for remand is not supportable in fact or in law. 7. The reference is accepted; revision of Gaon Sabha is allowed, and the order of Assistant Collector First Class, Chandauli Varanasi dated 15.1.81 is Set aside. But I see no need for remand of the proceeding for retrial and for spot inspection. The amount of damages has not been made clear in the report and no basis of its calculation is seen. So it is not apt to direct payment of damages. Order accordingly.