NIMMBA RAM Vs. PREMARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the order dtd. 31/7/2023 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants has been dismissed, affirming the order passed by the Board of Revenue dismissing the review as also the revisional order arising out of an order passed in the appeal, in the matter of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer in purported exercise of powers under Sec. 251-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of1955').

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants has made two-fold submissions. The first submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that in the present case, as the application filed by the respondents reads as it is, it was an application based on an allegation that the easementary right on an existing way has been disturbed and the text and tenor of the application was merely to restore the existing easementary right, therefore, such prayer could be examined only by the Tehsildar in proceedings drawn under Sec. 251 of the Act of 1955. According to learned counsel for the appellants, provisions under Sec. 251-A of the Act of 1955 would be attracted only in those eventualities where a prayer for opening of a new way is made in which eventuality, a compensation is required to be paid. This legal position was not appreciated by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Board of Revenue and by the learned Single Judge. The application was not maintainable before the Sub- Divisional Officer but it could have been entertained only by the Tehsildar under Sec. 251 of the Act of 1955.