JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This reference has been made by the Additional commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi vide his recommendation dated 9.9.1982. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in the court of Additional Commissioner a proceeding under Section 198 was started on the ground that the disputed plot was Khalihan, hence the allotment for non-transferable bhumidhari right was invalid and against law. The Additional Commissioner on 23.4.1981 abated the proceeding under Sub-Clause 9 of Section 198 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. He also ordered that no sirdari right could be confirmed and the land should be deemed to be allotted to the revisionist form year to year. Paltoo Challenged that order before the Additional commissioner on the ground that the allotment proceeding was null and void, therefore, it could not be abated. The learned Additional Commissioner has recommended that the references should be accepted and the order of the trial court should be directed to decide the proceeding afresh. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 4. The Additional commissioner made the recommendation on 9.9.1982 and since then this proceeding is pending in this court almost 10 years time has been given to the allottee to continue on account of this reference. The Position of asami is year to year. The trial court has also specifically mentioned this fact if the land is of public utility and needed for public purpose, the allottee could have been ejected after a year from the order of the trial court. 5. In these circumstances of the case I do not want to give more time to the allottee to remain in possession if the Land Management committee needs the land they can straightway start the proceeding for the ejectment of the allottee. Therefore, this reference is not accepted and it is rejected and the order of the trial court is maintained.