Allahabad High Court
ARJUN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The court held that no interference was required as the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
Arjun Singh filed a public interest litigation seeking the removal of an alleged encroacher (respondent No.5) from Gaon Sabha land (Gata No.90). The State of U.P. and six other respondents opposed the relief, arguing that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioners' counsel and the respondents' counsel appeared before the bench. The court examined whether it could interfere directly or whether the statutory remedy was sufficient. Finding that the petitioner could approach the appropriate authority under the Revenue Code, the court held that no judicial interference was warranted. Consequently, the PIL was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the court should entertain a PIL seeking removal of an alleged encroacher from Gaon Sabha land
- Whether the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 bars judicial intervention
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- land encroachment
- Gaon Sabha land
- alternative remedy
- Section 67
- U.P. Revenue Code
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2301 of 2026
Arjun Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hashim Khan, Manvendra Kumar,
Shafak Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Suresh Singh
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard Sri Hashim Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Suresh Singh, learned
counsel for respondent no. 6 and 7.
2. The instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed specifically with a
prayer that the possession of the alleged encroacher i.e. respondent no. 5
be removed from Gata No. 90 measuring 0.0570 which are Gaon Sabha
land.
3. Learned counsel representing Nagar Palika Parishad and learned
Standing Counsel for the State respondents state that the petitioner has an
efficacious alternative remedy to approach the appropriate Authority
under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
4. Under the facts and circumstances, no interference is required by this
Court. Accordingly, the instant Public Interest Litigation stands dismissed
.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)
September 24, 2026
Sumit S
Digitally signed by :-
SUMIT SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…