Allahabad High Court
Arun Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 10 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:197260
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3454 of 2025
Arun Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)
:
Gaurav Sisodia
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
C.S.C.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the instant public interest litigation upon Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-gaon sabha during the course of the day.
2. Heard Mr. Gaurav Sisodia, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mridul Kumar, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents and Mr. Sher Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha.
3. The instant Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) has been filed for the following reliefs:-
"I. A writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent No-2 to take appropriate action in respect of eviction of respondent no-4 from gata No-452va situated at Village-Nawadawan, Tehsi-Faridpur, District-Bareilly, which is a gram sabha land and has been recorded as pond in revenue records.
II. A writ, order or direction in nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent No-2 to take appropriate action in respect for compliance of his order dated 24.06.2025 passed in case no-T202412130302498 (Gram Sabha Vs Rajendra) under section 67 of U. P. Revenue Code 2006."
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the order passed by the Tehsildar on 24.6.2025 for ejectment and damages in respect to plot no.452 against respondent no.4, the order has not been given effect to. He submitted that order dated 24.6.2025 has attained finality. He submitted that appropriate direction be issued for removal of illegal encroachment from the plot in question in pursuance of the order dated 24.6.2025.
5. 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.
6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. There is no dispute about the fact that the order for ejectment and damages has been passed by the Tehsildar in respect to the plot in question on 24.6.2025.
8. 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/execution of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
9. 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