Allahabad High Court
DEENANATH VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 10 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Holding
The Court directed the Tehsildar to decide the eight pending revenue cases expeditiously after hearing, and disposed of the PIL without granting mandamus.
Summary
The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State and other respondents to remove illegal encroachments on land registered as Ambedkar Park and pond, which belongs to the Gram Sabha as public utility land. The petitioner highlighted eight pending cases under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against private respondents occupying the land, urging speedy disposal so that the encroachments could be removed. The respondents argued that the pending revenue matters should be decided by the Tehsildar in accordance with law. The Court noted that the eight cases are indeed pending before the Tehsildar of Rasra, Ballia, and found no dispute on this fact. Consequently, the Court disposed of the PIL, directing the Tehsildar to decide the eight cases expeditiously after affording a proper hearing to the parties, rather than issuing a mandamus for removal of the encroachments.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing removal of encroachments on public utility land in the present PIL
- Whether the pending revenue cases under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 should be decided by the Tehsildar
- Whether the PIL is an appropriate remedy for the alleged illegal encroachment
Legislation cited
- U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 — s. 67
Subjects
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- Encroachment
- Public Utility Land
- Revenue Code
- Tehsildar
- Expeditious Disposal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 664 of 2026
Deenanath Verma
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 10 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dewesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Tehsildar Rasra
District Ballia as respondent no.12 in the writ petition during course of
the day.
2. Heard Mr. Dewesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner,
Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the
State respondents and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned Counsel for
respondent- Gaon Sabha.
3. The instant public interest litigation has been filed for the following
relief:-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to remove the illegal encroachment made by
the respondent nos. 4 to 10 from the arazi No. 439 area 0.0770 hectare
and arazi no. 366sa area 0.2390 hectare which are belonging to Gram
Sabha as public utility land registered in revenue record as Ambedkar
Park and pond."
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that eight cases have been
registered under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against the
private respondent as case No. 621 of 2022 (State Vs. Ram Dular, case
No. 622 of 2022 (State Vs. Saral), case No. 623 of 2022 (State Vs.
Rajkumar), case No. 624 of 2022 (State vs. Chandradeep), case No. 573
of 2022 (State vs. Snehi Rajbhar), case No. 574 of 2022 (State Vs. Shyam
Sundar Rajbhar), case No. 575 of 2022 (State Vs. Nagina) and case No.
WPIL No. 664 of 2026
2
572 of 2022. He further submitted that in view of the entry of the plot in
question, the aforementioned eight cases should be decided within time
bound period so that encroachment over the plot in question can be
removed.
5. Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for
the State respondents as well as Counsel for the Gaon Sabha submitted
that pending proceeding shall be decided by the Tehsildar in accordance
with law.
6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the
parties and perused the records.
7. There is no dispute about the fact that eight cases under Section 67 of
U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 are pending before respondent no.12, Tehsildar
Rasra District Ballia.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant public
interest litigation is finally disposed of directing the respondent no.12,
Tehsildar Rasra District Ballia to decide the aforementioned eight cases
after affording proper opportunity of the hearing to the parties
expeditiously.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.)
March 19, 2026
Vandana Y.
Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…