JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This reference has been referred under Section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 by the Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut vide his order dated 21.9.1981. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a proceeding under Section 122-B of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 started in the course of Tahsildar/Assistant Collector Nagina, district Bijnor. Tahsidar imposed a damage of Rs. 54/- and ordered for ejectment from plot No. 30 area 6 yards on 30.8.1978. However an application was given by the revisionist to recall that order as no argument was heard. The trial court recalled that order on 16.2.1979 and dropped the proceeding. State Government filed revision against that order which has been recommended to this court that the Sub-Divisional Officer has no power to review his order. 3. Heard the learned D.G.C.(R) for the applicant. No one is present on behalf of the opposite-party. Perused the record. 4. I agreed with the recommendation of the Additional Commissioner that the trial court has no power to review its own order. However the original order of the trial court dated 30.8.1978 can also not be sustained, because that order was passed on filling the blanks on a proforma order, therefore, that is no order in the eye of law. Therefore, it is also liable to be set aside. Hence the order of the trial court dated 30.8.1978 and 16.2.1979 are set aside and the case is remanded to the trial court for fresh trial and decision in accordance with law.