S.R.YADAV, J. - (1.) THIS is a refer­ence dated 25-1-99 made by the Additional Commissioner, Faizabad Division, Faizabad for setting aside the CRO's order dated 25-9-93 passed in proceedings under Section 198(4)of UPZA and LR Act.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the revisionist and perused the records as nobody appeared on behalf of other side despite information as such the refer­ence/revision is heard ex pane and is decided accordingly. After hearing the learned Counsel for the revisionist and perusing the records it appears that on an application made by Sant Lal and others, the proceeding under Section 198 (4) of UPZA and LR Act was stated in respect of the plot No. 88-g, 89, 161, 502-g and 503 situate at village Janapur, Pargana Gaurijami, Tahsil Gauriganj, Distt. Sultanpur, the allega­tions made in the application were that the allottees in question were not eligible per­sons, that the land in dispute being covered one was not fit for agricultures that the allottees were the member of the Gaon Sabha and without Collector's permission they were not entitled for any allotment. Later on the said complainant absented from the proceedings as such, the CRO proceeded in the matter on suo motu and after obtaining Tahsil report cancelled the leases in question vide the order dated 25-9-93. Aggrieved by that order a revision was preferred before the Commissioner, Faizabad Division, wherein the aforesaid recommendation has been made by the learned Additional Commissioner for set­ting aside the order dated 25-9-93 and restoring the leases in question in favour of their allottees. A perusal of the learned Additional Commissioner's recommenda­tion shows that he has based his findings on some judicial observations made in likewise cases by the superior Courts whereby trees standing on any land will not create any obstacle in execution of Gaon Sabha leases to landless agricultural labourers. He holds that the allottees are landless agricultural labourers belonging to scheduled caste community. He also holds that the statement of Lekhpal concerned was in favour of the allottees and the land in question was found to be cultivated and crops are stated to have been sown thereon as such theJand should not be termed as unfit for agriculture; as the matter has neither been contested before the CRO nor before Addi­tional Commissioner nor before Board of Revenue ; hence in view of Additional Commissioner's recommendation I also hold that the leases in question are valid.
(3.) IN view of above, the Additional Commissioner's recommendation is liable tobe acceptedandrevisiondeservestobeallowed. In the result, the reference is ac­cepted, the revision is allowed and the order dated 25-9-93 passed by the CRO, Sultanpur is hereby set aside. Revision allowed.;