Allahabad High Court
AZEEZURRAHMANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed because the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
The petitioner, Azeezurrahman, filed a public‑interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State authorities to remove an alleged illegal encroachment on Gata No. 234, recorded as Pokhari land in Hengaipur, Azamgarh, and to protect the public‑utility land from further misappropriation. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and others, contended that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The Court examined the earlier judgment in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No. 655 of 2026) which upheld the principle that where a specific remedial provision exists, a writ petition is not maintainable. Relying on that precedent and the coordinate decision in Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. (2023 ADJ 226), the Court held that the petition could not be entertained. Consequently, the petition was disposed without granting any relief, with a direction that the petitioner may pursue the Section 67 application before the appropriate authority.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, rendering the writ petition non‑maintainable.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- Illegal Encroachment
- Public Utility Land
- Alternative Remedy
- Revenue Code
- Jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1210 of 2026
Azeezurrahman
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 8 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jagadish Prasad Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State respondents. Sri Prem Bahadur Singh, holding brief of R. P.
Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief(s):
"(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondent authority to remove the illegal
encroachment over gata no. 234 which is recorded as Pokhari
land, situated at Village-Hengaipur, Tehsil-Sagadi, District-
Azamgarh.
(ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondent authority to protect the
damage/misappropriation of the public utility land as gata no.
234 which is recorded as Pokhari, situated at Village-
Hengaipur, Tehsil-Sagadi, District-Azamgarh."
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
WPIL No. 1210 of 2026
2
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ
226.
4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to
entertain the instant petition.
5. In case the petitioner moves an application under Section 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 present petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 7, 2026
Ashok Kr.
Digitally signed by :-
ASHOK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…