DHANE SINGH Vs. RAMAVTAR AND OTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special appeal has been filed by the appellant Dhane Singh against the order dated 13.07.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed. The appellant in the writ petition challenged judgments dated 13.09.2017 and 07.05.2018 passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer as also order dated 28.02.2014 passed by the Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar.

(2.) Mr. R.P. Garg, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the learned Board of Revenue as also the Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana have erred in law in not appreciating the fact that no easementary rights can accrue to a tenant if he has an alternate route for approaching from his agricultural holding to his house. He therefore cannot claim for a direct route. The Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana as well as the Board of Revenue have wrongly exercised the power under Section 251 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') by directing to provide way to Respondent No. 1 from his agricultural holding to his house. It is argued that even if the existing way is slightly longer that cannot be a reason to claim the way through the agricultural land of the appellant wholly on the ground of its being short. It is argued that application under Section 251 of the Act was not maintainable as according to Section 251A of the Act, the Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana was not having any jurisdiction. Order dated 28.02014 passed by the Tehsildar was without jurisdiction. The Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana has exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 251 of the Act in passing the impugned order for providing the way to Respondent No. 1 by use of bullock carts and tractors etc. Learned counsel, during the course of arguments, referred to order dated 16.11.2016 passed by the Additional District Collector, Sikar (for short 'the Additional District Collector'), who in the appeal filed by the appellant has reversed the order dated 28.02014 passed by the Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana and argued that the Board of Revenue was wholly unjustified in interfering in that order on its whims and fancies. Order dated 16.11.2016 passed by the Additional District Collector, Sikar was based on objective assessment of the records. Learned counsel for the appellant, in support of his arguments, relied upon the judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Single Bench of this Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur in Bagh Singh Vs. The Board of Revenue, Ajmer & Others,2016 1 WLC(Raj)(UC) 338.

(3.) Learned counsel for Respondent No. 1 opposed the appeal and supported the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, learned Board of Revenue and the Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar.