Allahabad High Court
RAJAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that a writ petition cannot be entertained when a competent alternative statutory remedy is available to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajan Kumar, filed a PIL seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to provide drainage facilities and repair an encroached old nala in Village Berkhera Chauhan to prevent disease. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Sections 26 and 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The Court relied on the precedent set in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No.655 of 2026) and Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. (2023 ADJ 226), which hold that when an alternative statutory remedy exists, a writ petition should not be entertained. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the petition and ordered its disposal, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under the Revenue Code.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition for mandamus when an alternative remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 is available.
- Whether the petitioner should first approach the appropriate authority under Sections 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 for drainage facilities.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 26, 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- Alternative Remedy
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Environmental Law
- Drainage
- Administrative Law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2359 of 2026
Rajan Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Panchu Ram Maurya, Shashank
Maurya
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arun Kumar Pandey, C.S.C., J.N.
Maurya
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Sri Panchu Ram Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondents State and Sri Kushagra
Agarwal, holding brief of Sri J.N. Maurya, learned counsel for the
respondent nos.7 and 8. Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, Advocate, has accepted
notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"(I) A writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding and
directing to the respondents to provide drainage facilities to exit the dirty water
including Rainy Season water from the Village Berkhera Chauhan, to clean and
repair the Old Nala which is running through the Khasra No. 13 Area 0.0460 Hectare
and as well as in Khasra No. 70 Area 0.0250 Hectare which has been encroached and
blocked, otherwise the villagers of Village Berkhera Chauhan will suffer great
hardship due to infection of several disease due to collection of dirty water in the
Village Berkhera Chauhan."
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
WPIL No. 2359 of 2026
2
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.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
October 1, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…