Allahabad High Court
KISHUN DEVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that where an alternative remedy under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, exists, the writ petition cannot be entertained.
Summary
Kishun Dev filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State to evict illegal encroachments on a public road in Ahirauli Lala, Deoria. The petition alleged that respondents 6‑8 were occupying 0.160 hectare of road land. The respondents’ standing counsel argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Sections 26 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, citing the Court’s recent decisions in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. The Court agreed that the existence of an alternative statutory remedy barred the writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was not entertained and was disposed of, with a direction that the petitioner may approach the appropriate revenue authority if it wishes to pursue the matter.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition when an alternative remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, is available to the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- mandamus
- illegal encroachment
- alternative remedy
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- writ petition
- eviction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2295 of 2026
Kishun Dev
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the respondents State. Sri Sudhir Bharti, Advocate, has accepted
notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"(A) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondent No. 3 and 4 to evict the illegal encroachment in public road
by the respondent Nos. 6 to 8 from the arazi No. 252 area 0.160 hectare recorded in
road in Village Ahirauli Lala, Tehsil Salempur, District Deoria."
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 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 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 26/67 of
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the
WPIL No. 2295 of 2026
2
same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in
accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 24, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…