JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - These three reference has been made by the Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra vide his order dated 7.1.1986. 2. In brief the facts of the reference are that proceeding for cancellation of allotment of Hori Lal, Vidya Ram and Ramesh Chandra started on the report of Lekhpal that they are not landless agricultural labourers. They had land before the allotment and after the allotment they had acquired more than 5 acres of land, hence the allotment is illegal and it should be cancelled. Notice were issued under Section 198(5) of the Act by the Additional Collector. 3. After the contest and taking of the evidence of the parties the Additional Collector cancelled the lease on 31.1.1985 on the ground that they have acquired more land than the prescribed limit, they are not landless agricultural labourers and one of the allottee is not resident of the village and he is teacher in a school. 4. Against that order three revisions were filed. The learned Additional Commissioner after consolidating all the three revisions had made this reference that the notice under Section 198(5) was issued on 28.1.1984. It was time barred, hence the notice was illegal. On this ground he recommended that the cancellation of allotment proceeding should be dropped and the order of the trial court dated 31.1.1985 should be set aside. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the record. 6. The limitation for issuing the notice under Section 198(5) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 is 7 years. This amendment has been effected from the retrospective effect. The provision of Sub-section 5 of Section 198 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 was incorporated by the Amendment Act No. 20 of 1982 which was published in month of August 1982. The notice was issued in the month of January 1984. The period according to that was also not expired. In these circumstances the recommendation of the learned Addl. Commissioner is not accepted. He wrongly had calculated the period of limitation in this proceeding. Therefore, references are rejected and the order of the trial court is restored. This order shall govern reference Nos. 171 to 173 of 1985-86/Etah.