Arvind Kumar Singh @ Behosh Jaunpuri vs State of U.P. and 8 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Arvind Kumar Singh @ Behosh Jaunpuri vs State of U.P. and 8 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No mandamus granted; petition disposed of on the ground of alternative remedy, with the observation that any application moved by the petitioner under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 shall be decided after hearing all concerned parties in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether a mandamus should issue commanding respondent no.4 to initiate ejectment proceedings against respondents no.7, 8 and 9 under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in respect of Bheeta Land of Gata No.106, Village Lazipur, Tehsil Sadar, District Jaunpur. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, the Court is not inclined to entertain the petition.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 before the appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PIL (PIL No. 1234 of 2026, Arvind Kumar Singh @ Behosh Jaunpuri v. State of U.P. and 8 Others), High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, decided on May 12, 2026 by Arun Kumar, J. The petitioner sought a mandamus directing respondent no.4 to initiate ejectment proceedings against respondents no.7, 8 and 9 under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in respect of Bheeta Land of Gata No.106, Village Lazipur, Tehsil Sadar, District Jaunpur. Accepting the preliminary objection of alternative remedy raised by the Standing Counsel, and in view of the Division Bench judgment in Amaruddin Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and 5 others (PIL No.655 of 2026, decided 18.03.2026), which upheld the Coordinate Bench decision in Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2023 (12) ADJ 226, the Court held that since the petitioner had an alternative remedy it was not inclined to entertain the petition, and observed that any application under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 moved by the petitioner shall be decided after hearing all concerned parties in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 1234 of 2026

Arvind Kumar Singh @ Behosh Jaunpuri

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 8 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Vinay Kumar Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C.

Court No. - 55

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri B. K. Tripathi, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha.

The present petition has been filed for the following relief(s):

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no.4 to initiate ejectment proceedings against the respondent no.7, 8 & 9 under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 of Bheeta Land of Gata No.106 situated at Village Lazipur, Tehsil Sadar, District Jaunpur."

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 .

Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition.

WPIL No. 1234 of 2026

2

In case the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.

(Arun Kumar,J.)

May 12, 2026

Ashok Kr.

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