Allahabad High Court

OM PRAKASH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

Decided: 17 May 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The Tehsildar must evict respondents 6‑10 from plots 182 and 66 under sub‑rule 5 of Rule 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016.

Summary

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking the eviction of respondents 6‑10 who had re‑encroached on public utility land comprising plot no. 182 (recorded as Pond) and plot no. 66 (recorded as Bheeta) in Mirza Adampur, Azamgarh. The respondents had previously been ordered by the Tehsildar under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 to vacate the land, but after removal of the initial encroachment they re‑occupied it, leading to a criminal FIR. The petitioner argued that the pending criminal proceedings should not impede the authorities from enforcing eviction. The Court referred to sub‑rules (5) and (7) of Rule 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016, which empower immediate action against encroachers. It directed the Tehsildar to evict respondents 6‑10 under sub‑rule 5 of Rule 67 and to restore possession to the Land Management Committee within one month, provided no other legal impediment exists. The petition was consequently disposed with the said direction.

Issues considered

Whether the authorities can be directed to evict encroachers despite pending criminal proceedings
Whether sub‑rule 5 of Rule 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 applies to the present re‑encroachment

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code Rules, 2016 — s. Rule 67 sub‑rule 5, Rule 67 sub‑rule 7

Subjects

public interest litigation
eviction
encroachment
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
land management
sub‑rule 67
criminal proceedings

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1535 of 2023

Om Prakash Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla

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

1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri R. P. Shukla, learned
counsel for the respondent Gaon Sabha.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondent authorities to make eviction of respondent nos.6 to 10 over the
plot no.182 recorded as Pond and plot no.66 recorded as Bheeta in the
revenue records relating to Village Mirza Adampur, Tehsil Lalganj,
District Azamgarh.

3. On 24.08.2023, following order was passed:

"1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, counsel

for respondent No.5/Land Management Committee.

2. Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-

respondents has placed the instruction dated 03.07.2003 before this Court, which is taken

on record.

3. In the instruction, it is mentioned that in pursuance of the order passed by Tehsildar in

the proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 encroachment over plot in

dispute has been removed by private respondents but again encroachment has been made,

accordingly, criminal proceeding has been initiated against the private respondents.

4. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents shall serve copy

of the instruction upon counsel for the petitioner during course of the day.
WPIL No. 1535 of 2023
2

5. Counsel for the petitioner shall file reply to the averment made in the instruction within

three weeks.

6. List this matter in the additional cause list on 21st September, 2023."

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, reply to the instruction has been
filed by the petitioner stating that though first information report has been
lodged against the respondent nos.6 to 10 but the encroachments made by
them over the public utility land over plot nos.66 and 182 has not been
vacated. In the garb of pendency of criminal proceedings, the respondent
authorities are not ensuring eviction of respondent nos.6 to 10, even
though, their illegal encroachment has been accepted on record.

5. Learned Additional Chief Standing has referred to provision of sub-
rules (5) and (7) of the rule 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 and
contended that immediate action will be taken against the encroachers for
getting the land vacated.

6. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with
direction to the Tehsildar, Lalganj, Azamgarh to immediately take action
against the respondent no.6 to 10 under the provisions of sub-rule 5 of
rule 67 of the Rules, 2016 and ensure that re-encroachment of plot
nos.182 and 66 by them is removed and the possession is handed over to
the Land Management Committee. It is further directed that the said
exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of
presentation of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal
impediment.

(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 18, 2026
Ashok Kr.

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…