Allahabad High Court
SIDDHARTH RAIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the occupation does not constitute illegal encroachment.
Summary
The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking a court direction to remove alleged illegal encroachments on Plot Nos. 37 and 39 in Village Hathini, District Mau. The plots had been earmarked for a Harijan Abadi under consolidation proceedings, and houses have been occupied for 30 years by families belonging to the Scheduled Caste. The court examined an instruction dated 26‑September‑2026 from the Tehsildar confirming the earmarking and the nature of occupants. It held that because the occupants are Scheduled Caste residents and the land was designated for Harijan Abadi, the occupation cannot be termed encroachment. Consequently, the petition was found to be without merit and was dismissed, though the court allowed the possibility of a fresh petition if non‑Scheduled Caste encroachments are discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether the occupation of plots earmarked for Harijan Abadi by Scheduled Caste families constitutes illegal encroachment actionable under law
- Whether the public interest litigation seeking removal of such occupation is maintainable
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- illegal encroachment
- Harijan Abadi
- land consolidation
- Scheduled Caste
- petition dismissed
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2342 of 2026
Siddharth Rai
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pavan Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
the State respondents and Sri Prem Bahadur Singh holding brief of Sri
Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent Gaon
Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondent authorities to ensure removal of illegal encroachment made by
encroachers/private respondents over plot nos. 37 & 39 recorded as
Naveen Parti in the relevant revenue records relating to Village Hathini
Tehsil Sadar, District Mau.
3. Today when the case was taken up, the instruction dated 26.9.2026,
sent by the Tehsildar Sadar, District Mau, has been placed before the
Court by learned Standing Counsel, which is taken on record.
4. Perusal of the aforesaid instruction shows that Plot Nos. 37 & 39,
recorded as Navin Parti in the revenue records have been earmarked for
Harijan Abadi in C.H. Form 41 & 45 prepared during consolidation
proceedings. At present various houses have been constructed over Plot
Nos. 37 & 39 for the last 30 years in which people are residing. All the
occupants of the houses belong to schedule caste category and there is no
other house of any villager over the aforesaid plots.
5. In view of the aforesaid, as Plot Nos. 37 & 39 were earmarked for
Harijan Abadi during consolidation proceedings and houses of persons
belonging to scheduled caste category are existing over it, it cannot be
WPIL No. 2342 of 2026
2
held to be encroachment by respondent nos. 4 to 8, as alleged in the
present PIL.
6. In view of the above, the present petition is devoid of merit and is
accordingly dismissed.
7. However, dismissal of the present petition would not be an impediment
in filing a fresh petition, if the petitioner finds that persons other than
belonging to scheduled caste category have encroached upon the plots in
question.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
September 30, 2026
Ranjeet Sahu
Digitally signed by :-
RANJEET SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…