Allahabad High Court
SHESHNATH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The restoration application under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 must be decided by the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, and the respondent is directed to pass the appropriate order within two months.
Summary
Sheshnath Yadav filed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to remove an illegal encroachment by respondent 6 on Plot No.705Mi, recorded as Usar in Mahuwari village, Jaunpur district. The petitioner argued that a proceeding under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, initiated against respondent 6, was improperly dropped because of a pending demarcation of Plot No.706, and that the restoration application filed on 30‑12‑2025 should be revived and decided. The Court examined the contention that the restoration should be decided by the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar of Madiyahun. It held that the restoration application must indeed be decided and directed respondent 4 to pass the appropriate order in the pending case (No.T202414360604385) within two months. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the restoration application under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, should be revived and decided despite the earlier dropping of the proceeding.
- Whether the High Court can direct the revenue officer to pass an order on the restoration application.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67(1)
Subjects
- PIL
- illegal encroachment
- land revenue
- restoration of proceedings
- Section 67
- Usar
- demarcation
- land dispute
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2236 of 2026
Sheshnath Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vishwajit Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondent nos.2 to 5 to remove the illegal encroachment made by
respondent no.6 over Plot No.705Mi area 0.1980 hectare, recorded as
Usar in the relevant revenue records, relating to Village Mahuwari, Tehsil
Madiyahun, District Jaunpur.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the proceeding
under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 was initiated against
the respondent no.6. However, due to the proceedings of demarcation of
his bhumidhari Plot No.706, the aforesaid proceeding was dropped. As no
discrepancy was found in the Plot No.706, therefore, the proceeding
under Section 67, which was dropped due to the pending demarcation
proceeding, was liable to be restored and decided afresh. The petitioner
has moved a restoration application, which is pending consideration since
30.12.2025.
4. In view of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, if the
restoration filed by him is decided by the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar,
Madiyahun, District Jaunpur, his grievance stands redressed.
5. In the aforesaid circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of
with direction to the respondent no.4 to decide the restoration, being Case
No.T202414360604385, by passing appropriate order, in accordance with
WPIL No. 2236 of 2026
2
law, after hearing the parties concerned, within a period of two months
from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 18, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…