Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

PUSHPENDRA PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

No direction can be issued for construction or restoration of the road on bhumidhari land as the petition is not maintainable.

Summary

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. to restore a road constructed in 2011-12 on plot no.295 under the MGNREGA scheme, which had been removed by a subsequent Gram Pradhan. The respondents contended that the plot is bhumidhari (private) land held by multiple tenure holders and not a public utility, rendering the PIL non‑maintainable, and suggested that any grievance about misappropriation of gaon sabha funds be pursued under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. The Court examined the Khatauni and found no evidence that the road was built with the consent of the tenure holders. Consequently, the Court held that it could not issue a direction for construction or restoration of a road on bhumidhari land. The petition was disposed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for the alleged misappropriation.

Issues considered

  • Whether a PIL seeking a mandamus for restoration of a road on bhumidhari land is maintainable.
  • Whether the Court can direct construction/restoration of a road on private (bhumidhari) land.
  • Whether the petitioner should pursue the grievance of misappropriation of gaon sabha funds under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • PIL
  • mandamus
  • bhumidhari land
  • public utility
  • road restoration
  • misappropriation of gaon sabha fund
  • U.P. Panchayat Raj Act
  • MGNREGA

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
          PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3777 of 2025

Pushpendra Patel
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s)       : Ashwani Kumar, Rajesh Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent(s)       : Achal Singh, C.S.C.

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

1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 4 and Sri Achal
Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.5.

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

     "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus,
     commanding the respondents to maintain the status of the
     Kairi-Korra Khurd Road as existing/made during the year
     2011-2012, within stipulated period or within time as fixed by
     this Hon'ble Court."

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a pathway
over plot no.295 was constructed in the year 2011-12 under MGNREGA
Scheme. However, the present Pradhan got the entire pathway dug out,
causing loss to the state exchequer. It is further prayed that a suitable
direction be issued to the state authorities for restoration of pathway over
plot in question.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has drawn
attention of the Court to Annexure-2 of the writ petition, which shows
that plot no.295 is a bhumidhari land recorded in the name of various
tenure holders. As it is not a public utility land, the present PIL is not
maintainable. He further contends that if the petitioner has any objection
regarding misappropriation of gaon sabha fund, appropriate applications
made be made under the provisions of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.
                                                                                           WPIL No. 3777 of 2025
                                                                   2


                                    5. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

                                    6. The Khatauni of plot no.295 shows that it is in respect of a bhumidhari
                                    land, over which earlier Gram Pradhan had constructed a road, which has
                                    been removed. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that
                                    the said road was constructed on the consent given by the tenure holders
                                    is not substantiated by any material evidence on record.

                                    7. In view of the aforesaid, no direction can be issued in the present PIL
                                    for construction/restoration of road on bhumidhari land.

                                    8. The present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
                                    approach the appropriate authority for misappropriation of gaon sabha
                                    fund made by the earlier Gram Pradhan.



                                                                                             (Arun Kumar,J.)
                                    May 18, 2026
                                    Ashok Kr.




Digitally signed by :-
ASHOK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.