Allahabad High Court
INDRAJEETversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed; the petitioner must approach the appropriate authority under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
Indrajeet filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State officials (respondents 2 and 3) to initiate proceedings under sections 136 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 against alleged encroachers on a Banjar land parcel in Jaunpur. The respondents' standing counsel objected, contending that the petitioner has an alternative remedy by filing an application under Section 67, relying on the Court's earlier decisions in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No.655 of 2026) and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. (2023 ADJ 226). The High Court held that the alternative remedy suffices and dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the appropriate authority under Section 67. Any subsequent application by the petitioner will be considered according to law.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel initiation of proceedings under sections 136 and 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in a PIL concerning encroachment on Banjar land.
- Whether the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy that bars the court's intervention.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 136, 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- Encroachment
- Revenue Law
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Alternative Remedy
- Banjar Land
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1154 of 2026
Indrajeet
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ankaj Kumar Pal, Ayush Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the respondent nos. 1 to 3. Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi has
accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 4.
2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondent no.2 and 3 to initiate the proceeding under section 136
and 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 respectively against the respondent
No. 5,6 & 7 who have made encroachment upon the Gata No. 692-Sa
measuring area 0.2087 hectare situated at Village Patahana, Pargana
Haveli, Tehsil Sadar, District Jaunpur recorded as Banjar in the revenue
record and remove the encroachment made by respondent No. 5,6 & 7
and her family from the aforesaid land in the interest of public and Gaon
Sabha."
3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that
petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by
moving an application under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue
Code, 2006, in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the
case of Amaruddin Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and 5 others, passed in
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No.655 of 2026, decided on 18.03.2026,
upholding the Coordinate Bench decision of this Court in the case of
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ
226.
WPIL No. 1154 of 2026
2
4. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with liberty
to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the appropriate
authority, under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. If any such
application is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and
decided, in accordance with law.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 5, 2026
Ranjeet Sahu
Digitally signed by :-
RANJEET SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…