Allahabad High Court
SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed because an alternative statutory remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is available to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Kumar Gupta, filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to remove an alleged illegal encroachment on land (Gata No. 1066) in Jaunpur district. The respondents, through their standing counsel, raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Sections 26 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The court referred to its 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), which held that where an alternative statutory remedy exists, a writ petition should not be entertained. Consequently, the court declined to entertain the petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate revenue authority. The writ petition was therefore disposed of without any order directing removal of the encroachment.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner has a viable alternative remedy under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, precluding the court's jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.
- Whether the court should issue a mandamus directing removal of the alleged illegal encroachment.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- Illegal Encroachment
- Alternative Remedy
- Revenue Law
- Jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1175 of 2026
Santosh Kumar Gupta
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Raj Prajapati, Rama Kant Gupta
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 respondents State. Sri Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi has accepted
notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"i. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus and directing
the respondents authorities to remove the the illegal encroachment over the
Gata No. 1066, area 0.085H situated at village Mohammadpur Kandh,
Pargana Haveli, Tehsil Sadar, District Jaunpur, recorded as Sector Marg in
revenue record within short stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble court
in the interest of justice."
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 26/67 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.
WPIL No. 1175 of 2026
2
5. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 26/67 of
Uttar 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
Checking your session…