Mithilesh Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 May 2026WPIL/1160/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternative remedy; Section 67 Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code 2006; encroachment on public utility land; Arazi No. 15, 16 & 17 (Banjar); Village Dharupur; Tehsil Handia; District Prayagraj; writ of mandamus; PIL disposed with liberty to approach appropriate authority; Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P., PIL No. 655 of 2026 (DB, decided 18.03.2026); Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P., 2023 (12) ADJ 226; Allahabad High Court; Arun Kumar, J.; Mithilesh Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and 4 Others; decided May 5, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the appropriate authority under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; any such application, if filed, to be considered and decided in accordance with law. ¶¶15

Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition seeking a writ of mandamus for removal of the alleged illegal encroachment by respondent no. 5 on public utility land (Arazi No. 15, 16 & 17 (Banjar), Village Dharupur, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj) should be entertained in view of the alternative remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶¶14

Court's answer

The petitioner has an alternative remedy of moving an application under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the appropriate authority; accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move such an application.

¶¶15

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner files such an application under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, it shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Arun Kumar, J.) disposed of a PIL (PIL No. 1160 of 2026, Mithilesh Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and 4 others) seeking a writ of mandamus for removal of alleged illegal encroachment by respondent no. 5 on public utility land, Arazi No. 15, 16 & 17 (Banjar), Village Dharupur, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj. On the preliminary objection of learned Standing Counsel, grounded in the Division Bench decision in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No. 655 of 2026, decided 18.03.2026), upholding the Coordinate Bench decision in Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P., 2023 (12) ADJ 226, the Court held that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and disposed of the petition with liberty to move an appropriate application before the appropriate authority; any such application to be considered and decided in accordance with law. Decided May 5, 2026.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1160 of 2026

¶3

Mithilesh Kumar Shukla

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 4 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Dhiraj Singh : Azad Rai, C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 55

¶10

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3. Sri Azad Rai has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 4.

¶12

The present petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶13

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents authorities to take necessary action for removing the illegal encroachment made by respondent no. 5 encroachment on (Public Utility Land) i.e. Arazi No. 15, 16 & 17 (Banjar) situated in Village- Dharupur, Tehsil Handia, DistrictPrayagraj."

¶14

Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an application under Section 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 Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ 226 .

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the appropriate authority, under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. If any such

¶16

WPIL No. 1160 of 2026

¶17

¶18

application is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law.

(Arun Kumar,J.)

May 5, 2026

Ranjeet Sahu