Allahabad High Court
Nijamuddin vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 10 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:197202
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3348 of 2025
Nijamuddin
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)
:
Sanjay Mani Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. G.K. Saxena, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the state-respondents and Mr. Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.
2. The instant Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) has been filed for the following reliefs:-
"1. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the authority concerned to take appropriate action and remove the encroachment made by the private respondent over Arazi No. 592, area 0.012 hectare, situated at Village Tedhi, Tappa Batesara, Tehsil- Padrauna, District - Kushi Nagar, which is recorded as "Compost Pit" (Khad Gaddha) in the relevant revenue record.
II. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Padrauna, District Kushi Nagar to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 04-09-2024 pending before him, expeditiously, within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court"
3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, an order for ejectment and damages has been passed by the Tehsildar against the private respondent no.6 on 26.12.2019 but till date the order has not been given effect to on the spot. He submitted that plot in question is recorded as manure pit in the revenue records. He submitted that the petitioner has filed applications before the authorities for implementation of the order as well as for removal of encroachment from the plot in question, but no steps have been taken by the authorities. He submitted that appropriate direction be issued for removal of illegal encroachment from the plot in question in pursuance of the order dated 26.12.2019.
4. Learned standing counsel and the counsel for the gaon sabha submitted that the instant public interest litigation for implementation of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is not maintainable.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
6. There is no dispute about the fact that the order for ejectment and damages has been passed by the Tehsildar on 26.12.2019 in respect to the plot in question.
7. For execution of the order passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, remedy is provided under paragraph 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, as such, the instant P.I.L. cannot be maintained for implementation of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
8. The P.I.L. is accordingly dismissed with observation that proper proceeding can be initiated according to the provision contained under Para 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual.
(Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) November 10, 2025 C.Prakash