Allahabad High Court

BABURAM THAKURversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The petition is dismissed because the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.

Summary

Baburam Thakur filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to remove an illegal encroachment on Plot No.131 in Village Baraitha, Deoria. The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Sections 26 and 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 held that because an alternative statutory remedy exists, it would not entertain the writ petition. It directed the petitioner to approach the appropriate revenue authority under the cited sections. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without any order against the respondents.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can entertain a PIL seeking removal of an illegal encroachment when the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.

Legislation cited

Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67

Subjects

public interest litigation
illegal encroachment
alternative remedy
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
writ petition
disposal

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2305 of 2026

Baburam Thakur
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashwani Kumar Sharma
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 a direction to the respondent
no.2 to remove the illegal encroachment made by encroachers over Plot
No.131 area 0.0120 hectare, recorded as Chakmarg in the revenue
records, relating to Village Baraitha, Tehsil Sadar, 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
same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in
accordance with law.
WPIL No. 2305 of 2026
2

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…