Disposed¶18

Ram Chandra Maurya v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Allahabad HC14 May 2026WPIL/3868/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternative remedy; preliminary objection; Section 26/67 Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006; encroachment over Chak Road / gaon sabha land; Plot No.436, Village Bairiparwan, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Bhadohi; PIL disposed of; Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P., PIL No.655 of 2026; Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P., 2023 (12) ADJ 226; Arun Kumar, J.; Allahabad High Court; decision dated May 15, 2026.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; writ petition disposed of on the ground of alternative remedy, with the direction that any application moved by the petitioner under Section 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 shall be decided by the appropriate authority after hearing all concerned parties, in accordance with law. ¶18

Ram Chandra Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the petitioner's alternative remedy of moving an application under Section 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 before the appropriate authority.

¶14

Court's answer

Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner moves an application under Section 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 before the appropriate authority, it shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in accordance with law.

¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Public interest litigation (PIL No. 3868 of 2025, Allahabad High Court, Arun Kumar, J.) seeking removal of alleged illegal encroachment by respondent nos.5 to 13 over Plot No.436 (area 0.0440 hectare), recorded as Chak Road in revenue records, Village Bairiparwan, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Bhadohi. Upholding the preliminary objection of learned Standing Counsel, and relying on the Division Bench decision in Amaruddin Ansari v. State of U.P. (PIL No.655 of 2026, decided 18.03.2026), which affirmed 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 of moving an application under Section 26/67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 and declined to entertain the petition. The writ petition was disposed of with the observation that any such application before the appropriate authority shall be decided after hearing all concerned parties, in accordance with law.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3868 of 2025

¶3

Ram Chandra Maurya

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 12 Others	.....Respondent
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ajai Kumar, Ravindra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C., Pradeep Singh

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Court No. - 55

¶9

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.

¶10

Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court on behalf of petitioner is taken on record.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents State. Sri Pradeep Singh has accepted notice on behalf of Gaon Sabha.

¶12

The present petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondent nos.2 and 3 to remove illegal encroachment made by respondent nos.5 to 13 over Plot No.436 area 0.0440 hectare, recorded as Chak Road in the revenue records, situated in Village Bairiparwan, Tehsil Gyanpur, District Bhadohi.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an application under Section 26/67 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 .

¶14

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

¶15

WPIL No. 3868 of 2025

¶16

¶17

In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 26/67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in accordance with law.

¶18

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Arun Kumar,J.)

May 15, 2026

Anil

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

Ram Chandra Maurya v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chandra Maurya v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amrjit vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Arvind Kumar Singh @ Behosh Jaunpuri vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Rajesh Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Yogesh Vs State of U.P and 9 Others

Sughar Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Baul Chauhan vs State of U.P. and 5 Others