Allahabad High Court
PARMESH BABU PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order to remove illegal encroachments on several plots of land designated as public utility in Payagpur village, Prayagraj district. The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, citing the Court's earlier decisions in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No.655 of 2026) and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. (2023 ADJ 226). The Court held that because an alternative statutory remedy exists, it would not entertain the petition. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and the matter was left to be decided by the appropriate revenue authority if the petitioner files an application under the said provision. The petition was therefore disposed of without any substantive order on the encroachment issue.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can approach the High Court for removal of illegal encroachment on public utility land, or must first avail the alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Illegal Encroachment
- Public Utility Land
- Alternative Remedy
- Section 67
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Jurisdiction
- Petition Dismissed
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2273 of 2026
Parmesh Babu Patel
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Prakash Singh, Mahendra
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C.
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State respondents. Sri Azad Rai, Advocate has accepted notice on
behalf of respondent 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 plot nos. 71, 372, 157, 158, 161, 225, 235, 297, 421-ङ and 449-ङ and
566 reserved as public utility land in the revenue records relating to
Village Payagpur, Tappa Manda, Tehsil Meja, District Prayagraj.
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, 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
WPIL No. 2273 of 2026
2
be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 23, 2026
Ashok Kr.
Digitally signed by :-
ASHOK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…