Back
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Kan Nath, through His Legal Representatives – Appellant
Versus
Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer – Respondent
How to determine the shortest or nearest route for granting a way to khatedar tenants under Section 251-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act? What are the procedural requirements for impleading a khatedar tenant as a necessary party when the proposed route involves their land? What is the legal consequence when appellate and revisional authorities fail to provide reasoning for deviating from the shortest route indicated in a Site Inspection Report?
Key Points: - The court emphasized that the shortest or nearest route must be provided as per the law when granting a way to khatedar tenants (!) (!) . - If the shortest route involves land belonging to another khatedar tenant, that tenant must be impleaded as a necessary party respondent (!) (!) . - Orders by the Revenue Appellate Authority and Board of Revenue were set aside because they failed to provide reasoning for not using the shortest route indicated in the Site Inspection Report (!) (!) . - The Site Inspection Report identified Option No. 2 (through Khasra No. 56) as the shortest route requiring only 15 Biswa land compared to 16 Biswa for the chosen route (!) (!) . - The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned orders dated 13.10.2022 and 31.07.2023 were quashed and set aside (!) . - Private respondents were directed to file a fresh application after impleading the khatedar tenants of Khasra Nos. 49 and 56 (!) . - If the previous orders have already been executed, the respondents are directed to restore the position as it existed prior to those orders (!) . - The Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (Section 251-A) and Rajasthan Tenancy Rules, 1955 (Rule 69) mandate the provision of the shortest or nearest route (!) .
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 13.10.2022 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority and the order dated 31.07.2023 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer.
3. Briefly, the facts noted in the present case are that the petitioners are recorded khatedars of a land bearing Khasra No. 49 at Village Bankas, Tehsil, Jaitaran, District Pali which is adjoining to the land located at Khasra No. 48 of private respondent Nos. 4 & 5. The private respondents are also recorded khatedar tenants of the lands of Khasra Nos. 54 & 55. Since there was no way for the private respondents to approach Khasra Nos. 54 & 55, an application under Section 251-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1955’) and the Rules framed thereunder was filed by the private respondents. The application so preferred was rejected by the learned Sub Divisional Officer, Jaitaran vide order dated 21.03.2022 on the ground that the private respondents-applicants have not arrayed the khatedar tenants of Khasra No. 56 as party respondents. The order passed by the SDO, Jaitaran was assailed by the private
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
