1. - We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for State. None has appeared for respondent No. 1 in spite of service.

2. The facts relevant to this appeal are that the appellant Uda Ram had applied before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanumangarh, a statutory authority under the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 for providing him access to his fields in Chuck No. 3 R.T.P. admeasuring 18 bighas of land for which there was no sanction of the State Government.

3. The applicant has given three suggestions for providing him access to his fields. The alternatives No. 1 and 2 were for providing a way through adjoining private lands of different khatedars, whereas third alternative was to provide way through a Government land in which the water course which has fallen in disuse was situated.

4. The Tehsildar, Sangaria recommended for providing right of way to the applicant through the third alternative which was the Government land and through which a Khala was entered as Gair Mumkin Khala. Dana Ram and Srikrishan filed objections and their contention was that since first choice was given by the applicant to have a right of way through stone No. 188/183, therefore, there was no justification for providing the applicant the way through Kila No. 1 to 5 of stone No. 187/184.

5. The SDM overruled that objection finding that alternatives No. 1 and 2 were through private lands and holders of the land were not prepared to part with the land even on payment of compensation whereas there can be no objection for providing way through the Government land where according to the report of the Assistant Engineer (Irrigation), the Khala was not in use. The SUM was of the opinion that there wound be no dispute about providing way through the Government land, in which case, there will be no occasion for determining compensation and payment of compensation. He also opined that by providing a way, the possibility of the land in question being encroached will also be reduced. Thus, he ordered providing access to the applicants' fields through the third alternative and to enter the Gair Mumkin Khala as Gair Mumkin Rasta. This order was passed on 30th August, 1982. This only amounted to change of user of Government land in records, Khala having already fallen in disuse.

6. In appeal filed by Dana Ram. the Revenue Appellate Authority maintained the way provided through Kila No. 1, 2 and 3 with modification that if through the land in question, Dana Ram would operate the water course with the permission of the Irrigation Department, in which case it will be public water course and everyone who could secure water supply from he said water course shall be entitled to secure the water through Irrigation Department and it shall not be exclusive privilege of Dana Ram to secure water from the said water course the same may be permitted, and if the Irrigation Department does not think it proper to open the water course, it shall remain a way to the applicant's land.

7. This order also noticed that prior to this application, the said Dana Ram has already encroached upon the land in question by making certain constructions over the land. It is during the course of this litigation that he has assured before the Revenue Appellate Authority that he shall remove his encroachments. The Revenue Appellate Authority has also noticed that the objector Dana Ram had deposited Rs. 10,000/- which has not been really explained for what purpose?

8. Be that as it may, the Revenue Appellate Authority made it clear that so far as making provision for access to the applicant's land is concerned, that was solved by providing him land through Murabas No. 35 from Killa No. 1 to 5 and in Muraba No. 36 where Dana Ram has encroached upon by constructing a Kothi that shall be removed subject to decision of the Irrigation Department to reopen the Khala. Appeal against that order was dismissed by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 13.1.1988.

9