Allahabad High Court

RAJ KUMAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The petition is not maintainable because an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available.

Summary

Petitioner Raj Kumar Pandey filed a PIL seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondents to remove alleged illegal encroachments on two parcels of land in Daulatnpur, Basti. The respondents, including the State of Uttar Pradesh, raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The court referred to its earlier decisions in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P., which held that where an alternative statutory remedy exists, a writ petition is not maintainable. Consequently, the court declined to entertain the petition and ordered its disposal. The matter was left to be decided by the appropriate authority if the petitioner pursues the Section 67 application.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available.
Whether the court can issue a mandamus directing removal of alleged illegal encroachments on the specified land.

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67

Subjects

public interest litigation
mandamus
land encroachment
alternative remedy
Section 67
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
writ petition

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1172 of 2026

Raj Kumar Pandey
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 8 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Kumar Gupta

Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondents State and Sri Pankaj Kumar
Gupta for the Gaon Sabha.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-

"I- Issue, a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondent no.2 to 5 to remove the illegal encroachment made by
respondent no.6 to 9 upon the Arazi No.153Mi area 0.1300 hectare and Arazi No.163
area 0.0400 hectare recorded as Garaha Situated at Village Daulatnpur, Pargana-
Basti Paschim, Tehsil-Harraiya, District- Basti."

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.

4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, this Court is not inclined
to entertain the instant petition.

5. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of Uttar
WPIL No. 1172 of 2026
2

Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall
be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 6, 2026
Anil

Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…