Disposed¶12

Megh Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC6 May 2026WPIL/3834/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; PIL No. 3834 of 2025, Megh Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 others; Coram: Arun Kumar, J.; decided May 7, 2026; Section 67(1) U.P. Revenue Code, 2006; Para 460(1) U.P. Revenue Court Manual; Tehsildar Chandausi, Sambhal; execution of order dated 13.07.2024 for eviction of respondent no.6 and recovery of damages; application sent by registered post; no proof of receipt; disposal with liberty to file fresh application; Gaon Sabha; C.S.C.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application under Para 460 of the Manual before respondent no.4 along with certified copy of the order; if such application is filed, respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law. ¶12

Megh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue to respondent no.4 - Tehsildar Chandausi, Sambhal to execute the order dated 13.07.2024 passed in proceedings under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, directing eviction of respondent no.6 and recovery of damages. +1 more

¶9

Ratio / Principle

There is nothing on record to show that the application under Para 460 sent through registered post was received in the office of the Tehsildar; the Court observed it was highly unacceptable that the petitioner came to Allahabad to file the present PIL but could not go personally to the concerned Tehsildar to file the said application.

¶11

Key takeaways

The present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application under Para 460 of the Manual before respondent no.4 along with certified copy of the order.ratio¶12
If any such fresh application under Para 460 of the Manual is filed, respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Public interest litigation seeking execution of the Tehsildar's order dated 13.07.2024 passed under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (directing eviction of respondent no.6 and recovery of damages), and registration of the petitioner's application dated 10.11.2025 under Para 460(1) of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual sent by registered post. Held: nothing on record showed that the registered-post application was received in the office of the Tehsildar, and it was highly unacceptable that the petitioner filed the PIL at Allahabad instead of approaching the Tehsildar personally; petition disposed of with liberty to move a fresh application under Para 460 of the Manual before respondent no.4, who shall consider and decide any such application in accordance with law.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3834 of 2025

¶3

Megh Singh

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 5 Others	.....Resp	ondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Girish Chandra Maurya, Abhishek	Kunwar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Arun Kumar Pandey, C.S.C.
Court No.- 55

¶7

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Girish Chandra Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the state respondents. Sri A. K. Pandey, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha.

¶9

The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.4 - Tehsildar Chandausi, Sambhal to execute the order dated 13.07.2024, passed by him, in proceedings under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, directing eviction of respondent no.6 and recovery of damages.

¶10

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an application dated 10.11.2025 under Para 460(1) of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual has been sent by the petitioner before respondent no.4 through registered post, however, no case has been registered till date.

¶11

Considering the submission made on behalf of the petitioner and upon perusal of record, it is evident that the application under Para 460 of the Manual has been sent through registered post. It is highly unacceptable that petitioner came to Allahabad for filing present PIL but could not go personally to the concerned Tehsildar for filing aforesaid application. There is nothing on record to show that the said application sent through registered post was received in the office of Tehsildar.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move fresh application under Para 460 of the Manual,

¶13

WPIL No. 3834 of 2025

¶14

¶15

before the respondent no.4 alongwith certified copy of this order. If any such application is filed, the respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law.

¶16

(Arun Kumar,J.)

¶17

May 7, 2026 Ashok Kr.

¶18

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

Megh Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Megh Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Shivbabu Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Praveen Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Roop Singh Vs State of U.P. and 17 Others

Ramvriksha Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Daya Shanker Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others