Allahabad High Court
SURYAPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
Because an alternative remedy under Sections 26 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available, the Court will not entertain the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Suryapal Singh, filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to take legal action against encroachers on Gaon Sabha land in Basti district. The respondents, including the State, argued that the petitioner had 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 (12) ADJ 226), which held that where a specific statutory remedy exists, a writ petition is not maintainable. 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 against the respondents.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the State to act against land encroachers when an alternative statutory remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is available.
- Whether the existence of a specific remedy under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code bars the Court from entertaining a public interest litigation.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Writ of Mandamus
- Alternative Remedy
- Land Encroachment
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Jurisdiction
- Statutory Remedy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1267 of 2026
Suryapal Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Prasad Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Kumar Gupta
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents State. Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Advocate, has
accepted notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus direct the respondent
authorities to take legal action against encroachers who were illegally encroached the
Gaon Sabha land of Gata No.57/0.0850 Hectare recorded as Chakroad and Gata
no.64/0.0400 Hectare recorded as Khad Gadha in Revenue Record situated at village-
Gobhia, Post -Bhadawal, 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 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.
5. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 26/67 of
WPIL No. 1267 of 2026
2
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 18, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…