K. VEERASWAMI, C.J. :- A piece of pathway was the subject-matter of proceedings before the Board of Revenue, it took the view that the appellant was not entitled to a ryotwari patta to this piece of land, as it was used as a pathway from time immemorial Incidentally, it recorded a finding that the claim of the appellant to a ryotwari patta for the land under Section 11 (a) of Madras Act XXVI of 1948 was not well founded. The Board, however, as it conceived the 'ends of justice' thought that they would be met by a recognition of the appellant's claim to the land under Section 19-A of the Abolition Act. It, therefore, in exercise of its powers under Section 19-A, directed that the appellant be allowed to remain in occupation of the land in S. No. 40/3, subject to payment of taram assessment and to the further conditions that he should allow the public to use the pathway as was done till then and that he should maintain the pathway in good condition. The Board also reserved the rights of the Government to resume the land at any time without any notice and at the occupant's risk; if any of the conditions were violated. This order of the Board was quashed by Palaniswamy, J., on