Allahabad High Court

RANJEET SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: ARUN KUMAR

Holding

The petition is disposed of, and the Tehsildar, Kishni, is directed to decide the pending Section 67(1) proceedings within three months.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjeet Singh, filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and others to remove alleged illegal encroachments by private respondents on several parcels of land recorded as Banjar, Abadi, and Chakmarg in the revenue records of Indrapur Sujanpur village. The court examined the revenue records and noted that some of the plots are already subject to pending proceedings under Section 67(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, concerning encroachment by specific individuals. The court held that the appropriate remedy is for the revenue officer, the Tehsildar of Kishni, to decide those pending proceedings rather than issuing a mandamus at this stage. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with a direction to the Tehsildar to resolve the Section 67(1) matters within three months of receiving the certified order. The decision emphasizes deference to the administrative process already underway under the revenue law.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing removal of encroachments on land recorded as Banjar, Abadi, and Chakmarg.
Whether the pending proceedings under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, are a sufficient and appropriate remedy, obviating the need for mandamus.

Legislation cited

U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67(1)

Subjects

encroachment
mandamus
U.P. Revenue Code
Section 67(1)
public interest litigation
land records
Banjar land
Tehsildar

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3549 of 2025

Ranjeet Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Murti Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Avinash
Chandra Srivastava, C.S.C.

Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Ram Murti Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Ashutosh Kumar
Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6 & 7. Sri Avinash Chandra
Srivastava, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 5.

2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief:

"(1) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondents to remove the illegal encroachment made by private
respondents no. 6 and 7 over Arazi no. 577Kha(area 0.1210 hectare) recorded as
Banjar in the revenue record, Arazi no. 567Kha(area 0.1190 hectare) recorded as
Abadi of Gaon Sabha, Arazi no. 386(area 0.085 hectare) recorded as Chakmarg and
Arazi no.388Kha(area 0.24 hectare) recorded as Banjar in the revenue record
situated in village Indrapur Sujanpur Mazra Chaturipura, Tehsil Kisni, District
Mainpuri within a stipulated period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

3. In pursuance of the orders of this Court dated 20.11.2025 & 5.12.2025,
instructions were called from the learned Standing Counsel and the
counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha. Today when the case was taken
up, the instructions dated 18.12.2025, sent by Tehsildar Kishni, Mainpuri,
has been placed before the Court, which is taken on record.

4. A perusal of the aforesaid report shows that Plot No. 577Kha, area
0.121 hectare is recorded as Banjar; whereas Plot No. 567Kha, area 0.119
hectare is recorded as Bhumidhari of Avanendra Singh, Mukesh Kumar,
WPIL No. 3549 of 2025
2

Savendra Singh and Harendra Singh. Plot No. 386, area 0.085 hectare is
recorded as Chakmarg. It is further stated that in CH Forms 41 & 45,
relating to Village Indarpur Sujanpur, Plot No. 388 is recorded as
minzumla number, of which Plot No. 388Ka, area 0.008 hectare is
Bhumidhari Land; whereas Plot No. 388Kha, area 0.24 acre is recorded as
Banjar. Portion of Plot No. 388, area 0.0360 hectare is recorded as Abadi,
which consists of some houses and a pathway.

5. Plot No. 386 has been encroached by three persons, namely Madanpal
Singh, Raghavendra Pal Singh and Ashwa Kumar, against whom
proceedings under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, have
been initiated and registered before the Tehsildar Kishni.

6. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with the
direction to the Tehsildar, Tehsil Kishni, District Mainpuri, to decide the
pending proceedings, under Section 67(1) of the Revenue Code, in
accordance with law, after hearing all the concerned parties, within a
period of three months, from the date of presentation of a certified copy of
this order, if already not decided, and ensure that the said proceedings are
brought to its logical end.

(Arun Kumar,J.)
April 20, 2026
Ranjeet Sahu

Digitally signed by :-
RANJEET SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…