Allahabad High Court
PRADEEP KUMAR SHAMRAversusSTATE OF U.P AND 8 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed as an abuse of process; the petitioner must seek relief under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
Summary
The petitioner, Pradeep Kumar Shamra, filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order directing the removal of an alleged illegal encroachment by respondents 5‑8 on Plot No.75 (0.0310 hectare) recorded as Goole (Naali) in the revenue records of Village Dhilvari, Budaun. The High Court noted that the petitioner had a specific statutory remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, to address such encroachments. Citing the Division Bench decision in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. and 5 others (PIL No.655 of 2026), the Court held that revenue authorities possess inherent jurisdiction to prevent misuse of public property and that a PIL under Article 226 in such circumstances is meritless and an abuse of process. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file an application under Section 67 before the appropriate authority. Any such application, if filed, will be decided in accordance with law.
Issues considered
- Whether a public interest litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable to seek removal of an illegal encroachment on public land.
- Whether the petitioner has a specific remedy under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, rendering the PIL unnecessary.
- Whether the petition constitutes an abuse of the court’s process.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- illegal encroachment
- Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
- Section 67
- abuse of process
- Article 226
- land dispute
- revenue law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 4052 of 2025
Pradeep Kumar Shamra
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P And 8 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajeet Kumar Srivastava, Chandra
Prakash Garg
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sher Bahadur Singh
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for
the respondents State. Sri Sher Bahadur Singh, Advocate has accepted
notice on behalf of respondent - Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent
no.2 to remove the illegal encroachment made by respondent nos.5 to 8
over Plot No.75 area 0.0310 hectare, recorded as Goole (Naali) in the
relevant revenue records, relating to Village Dhilvari, Tehsil Dataganj,
District Budaun.
3. By the previous order of this Court, instructions were called in the
matter from the learned Standing Counsel, but the same could not be
received.
4. Considering the nature of relief claimed in the present petition, it is
evident that the petitioner has a remedy for redressal of his grievance
under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The Division
Bench 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, has held that the authorities under the Revenue
Code have inherent jurisdiction to prevent the misuse of public property
and a public interest litigation petition before this Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India is meritless and an abuse of process of law.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with
WPIL No. 4052 of 2025
2
liberty to the petitioner to move an application under Section 67 of the
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority. If any
such application is filed by the petitioner, it shall be considered and
decided, in accordance with law.
(Arun Kumar,J.)
May 7, 2026
Anil
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…