Vishal Bagla Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vishal Bagla Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Public Interest Litigation seeking a direction to remove the encroachment made by respondent nos. 6 to 13 over the public utility land (Rasta, Arazi No.599 Ka) in pursuance of the order dated 23.04.2025 passed under Section 26 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is maintainable. +1 more

Court's answer

The instant Public Interest Litigation is clearly barred by the rules of the Court.

Ratio / Principle

The present Public Interest Litigation is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court, as the petitioner is espousing a private agenda and does not represent any class of persons unable to come to the Court on their own.

Key takeaways

The petitioner had himself filed the application under Section 26 of the Code, 2006 which resulted in the order dated 23.04.2025, and had himself approached the competent court to seek the order.ratio¶10
The enforcement of the order passed by the Tehsildar, Farenda, Maharajganj cannot be implemented by means of the present Public Interest Litigation.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Kunal Ravi Singh, JJ.) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation, PIL No. 661 of 2026 (Vishal Bagla v. State of U.P. and 12 others), in which the petitioner sought a direction to remove the encroachment made by respondent nos. 6 to 13 over public utility land (Rasta, Arazi No.599 Ka) in pursuance of an order dated 23.04.2025 passed under Section 26 of the U.P Revenue Code, 2006. The Court recorded that the Nagar Panchayat had stated that adequate proceedings to remove the encroachment were being initiated at its level, and that the petitioner had himself filed the application under Section 26 which resulted in the order dated 23.04.2025 and had himself approached the competent court to seek it. Holding that the petitioner was espousing a private agenda and did not represent any class of persons unable to come to the Court on their own, the Court found the PIL to be an abuse of the process of the Court, barred by the rules of the Court, and not a permissible means to enforce the order of the Tehsildar, Farenda, Maharajganj. Petition dismissed.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 661 of 2026

Vishal Bagla

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 12 Others	...	..Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Bhagwan Dutt Pandey : Ashok Kumar Tiwari, Bharti	C.S.C., Sudhir

Court No. - 21

HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Uttara Bahuguna, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents, Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel who has put his appearance on behalf of respondent no.5 and Sri Ashok Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.4.

The present Public Interest Litigation has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondent to remove the illegal encroachment made by respondent nos. 6 to 13 over the public utility land i.e. Rasta being Arazi No.599 Ka in pursuance of the order dated 23.04.2025 passed under Section 26 of the U.P Revenue Code, 2006 (for short, 'the Code, 2006').

Learned counsel representing Nagar Panchayat has placed on record the instructions that have been received by him. A perusal of the instruction shows that the adequate proceedings are being initiated at the Nagar Panchayat level to remove the necessary encroachment. It also transpires from the record that the petitioner had himself filed an application under Section 26 of the Code, 2006 which resulted in the order dated 23.04.2025. The petitioner himself had approached the competent court to seek the order, therefore, the present Public Interest Litigation on behalf of the petitioner has nothing but an abuse of process of the Court as it is clearly apparent that the petitioner is now espousing a private agenda and he does not represent any class of persons who are

WPIL No. 661 of 2026

2

unable to come to the Court on their own.The instant Public Interest Litigation is clearly barred by the rules of the Court and the enforcement of the order passed by the Tehsildar, Farenda, Maharajganj cannot be implemented by means of the present Public Interest Litigation.

Under the facts and circumstances, the present Public Interest Litigation is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, stands dismissed.

(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)

March 18, 2026

gp

Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad