Allahabad High Court
DEENANATH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed because the petitioners have an alternative remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
Petitioners Deenanath and two others filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order to remove illegal encroachments on specific land parcels in Village Bhendawa, Basti district. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and others, raised a preliminary objection that the petitioners could obtain relief by filing an application under Sections 26 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The court referenced earlier judgments (Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P.) which upheld the availability of such alternative remedies. Finding that the petitioners indeed have an alternative statutory remedy, the court declined to entertain the PIL. The petition was consequently disposed, with the court directing the petitioners to approach the appropriate revenue authority for relief.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners have an alternative remedy under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 to address the alleged illegal encroachment.
- Whether a public interest litigation can be entertained when an alternative statutory remedy is available.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- illegal encroachment
- land revenue
- alternative remedy
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- jurisdiction
- petition dismissed
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2282 of 2026
Deenanath And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ganesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Kumar Gupta
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel
for the State respondents. Sri P. K. Gupta, 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. 49, 51-Sa, 51 recorded as Pond, Banjar and Chakmarg in
the revenue records relating to Village Bhendawa Tappa Charkaila, Tehsil
and District Basti.
3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that
petitioners have alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by
moving an application under Section 26/67 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 petitioners have alternative remedy, I am not inclined to
entertain the instant petition.
5. In case the petitioners move an application under Section 26/67 of
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the
same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in
WPIL No. 2282 of 2026
2
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…