Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing order dated 26.12.1995 (Annex.4) passed by the Addl. Collector, Udaipur and order dated 17.8.1998 (Annex.6) passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer whereby the order of Addl. Collector was affirmed.

2. As per brief facts of the case, an application under Section 251 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 was filed by the petitioner before the Tehsildar, Dhariyawad with the submission that he is having Khatedari land in Aaraji No. 6/89, 6/90, 6/91 and 6/92 at Dhariyawad where only way is situated near the power house but the respondents nos. 1 and 2 obstructed the way, therefore, the order may be passed to open the existing way. The Tehsildar, Dhariyawad after inquiry passed an order on 6.10.1994 in favour of the petitioner and provided way in question to the petitioner as per situation at site.

3. Against the order dated 6.10.1994 the Rajasthan State Electricity Board preferred an appeal before the Addl. Collector, Udaipur and in that appeal the order dated 6.10.1994 was quashed by the Addl. Collector, Udaipur and the matter was remanded to the Tehsildar, Dhariyawad vide order dated 23.2.1995 to .1995 to decide afresh.

4. The Tehsildar, Dhariyawad again decided the matter vide order dated 31.5.1995 and reiterated his earlier order dated 6.10.1994.

5. Against the order dated 31.5.1995 passed by the Tehsildar, Dhariyawad again an appeal was preferred by the Electricity Board before the Addl. Collector, Udaipur. In the appeal it was pleaded that land situated in Aaraji no. 6 measuring 3 bighas and 6 biswas was allotted to the Electricity Board for construction of Sub-Station on lease. Further, it is observed that civil suit is pending in between the parties in the court of Civil Judge (Jr.Div.), Dhariyawad, therefore, this way cannot be granted. The learned Addl. Collector accepted the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Tehsildar vide order dated 26.11.1995. Against the order passed by the Addl. Collector, the petitioner preferred revision petition before the Board of Revenue, Ajmer. The Board of Revenue decided the revision petition vide order dated 17.8.1998 whereby the Board of Revenue held that the order of the Tehsildar, Dhariyawad is totally totally without jurisdiction and upheld the order passed by the Addl. Collector, Udaipur.

6. In this writ petition the petitioner is challenging validity of both the orders. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the orders impugned in this writ petition are totally illegal and without any foundation to stand because the Tehsildar, Dhariyawad after taking report from concerned Patwari passed the order impugned to open the way, therefore, both the orders passed by the Addl. Collector, Udaipur and Board of Revenue deserve to be quashed.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that proceedings at the behest of Rajasthan State Electricity Board are wholly unauthorized and baseless because Tehsildar, Dhariyawad passed an order on 6.10.1994 in accordance with law for the Government land, therefore, this writ petition may be allowed and both the orders impugned may be quashed.

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently argued that there is no error in the order passed by the Addl. Collector, Udaipur and Board of Revenue, Ajmer because as per the Section 251 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 no jurisdiction left with the Tehsildar to allot the land for the purpose of opening the way, therefore, this writ petition may be dismissed.

9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the Section 251 of the Tenancy Act, which reads as under:

"251. Rights of way and other private easement. - (1) In the event of any holder of land, in actual enjoyment of a right of way or other easement or right, having, without his consent, been disturbed in such enjoyment otherwise than in due course of law, the Tehsidlar may, on the applicati