- (1.) GIRDHARI Lal, J. This refer ence has been received by the order of the learned Additional Commissioner dated 29-11- 1994 in which learned Additional Commissioner has recommended for set ting aside the order of the trial Court.
(2.) NO body is present in this case. In brief, the facts of the case are that ASDO vide his order dated 13-1-89 has decided issue No. 8 which was related to the fact whether the land in dispute is Abadi or agricultural land holding mat the disputed land is agricultural land and it is not abadi land. Against this order a revision was preferred by Rajendra Kumar etc. before the Additional Commissioner in which he has recommended that the order of the learned trial Court be set aside and issue No. 8 should be decided by the SDO, Shahjahanpur. According to Section 331 -A when in any suit question arises whether the disputed land is land and which is being used for purposes con nected with agriculture, horticulture or animal husbandry which includes piscicul ture. This issue is to be decided by the Assistant Collector Incharge of the sub division. It is clear from the lower Court file that this issue was decided by ASDO on 13-1-89. According to Section 331 -A ASDO has no jurisdiction to decide this issue. Heno5 the recommendation made by learned Additional Commissioner dated 29- 11-94 is correct. The recommendation made by learned Additional Commissioner vide his order dated 29-11-94 is accepted the order of the trial Court dated 13-1-89 is set aside and the case is remanded back to SDO, Shahjahanpur with a direction that this issue should be decided as a prelimi nary issue and after deciding this issue he should decide the case on merits accord ing to law. Reference accepted .;