Allahabad High Court
PAWAN KUMAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 16 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed because an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available.
Summary
Petitioner Pawan Kumar Pandey filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order to remove illegal encroachment on land recorded as Banjar (Khalihan) in the revenue records of Mauja Majhauwa, Madhuban, District Mau. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and 16 others, contested the petition, arguing 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. (PIL No. 655 of 2026) and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. (2023 (12) ADJ 226), which held that when a specific statutory remedy exists, a writ petition cannot be entertained. Consequently, the court declined to hear the petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under the statutory provision. The writ petition was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the court can entertain a PIL seeking removal of illegal encroachment when an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available.
- Whether the petitioner is required to approach the revenue authority under the statutory provision before seeking judicial intervention.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- illegal encroachment
- land revenue
- alternative remedy
- Section 67
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- writ petition
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2232 of 2026
Pawan Kumar Pandey
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 16 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Singh, Raghvendra
Tripathi, Rohit Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents State. Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, Advocate, has
accepted notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent
authorities to remove the illegal encroachment made by the encroachers
over Sabik No.641, Gata No.530, recorded as Banjar (Khalihan) in the
revenue records, relating to Mauja Majhauwa, Tehsil Madhuban, District
Mau.
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
Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall
WPIL No. 2232 of 2026
2
be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 18, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…