Allahabad High Court

BHAGVAT MAURYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The petition is dismissed because 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 direction to remove illegal encroachment on plot no. 140 in Village Sameda, Azamgarh. The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, citing earlier judgments (Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P.). The court examined the preliminary objection and held that because an alternative statutory remedy exists, the petition cannot be entertained. Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to approach the appropriate revenue authority under the said provision. The petition was therefore disposed of without further hearing.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, rendering the PIL inadmissible
Whether the court can entertain a PIL when a specific statutory remedy is available

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67

Subjects

public interest litigation
illegal encroachment
alternative remedy
revenue law
section 67
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
petition dismissed

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2281 of 2026

Bhagvat Maurya
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)

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

Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri C. K. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri R. P. Shukla, 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 no. 140 recorded as Pond in the revenue records relating to
Village Sameda, Tappa Bihrojpur, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgarh.

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
be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.
WPIL No. 2281 of 2026
2

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…