HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 3083 of 2025 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. T.P. Gupta, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents, Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.5 and Mr. Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha. 2. The instant Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) has been filed for the following relief:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to evict the encroacher/respondent no. 5 from disputed public land i.e. Gata (Chakroad) No. 764(m)/0.0550 hectare, Gata (Banjar) No. 712/0.0970 hectare & Gata (Naveern Parti) No. 763(m)/0.360 hectare situated at revenue village-Karuadeeh, Tehsil Handiya, District- Prayagraj in pursuance of the eviction orders dated 27- 06-2024 & 25-10-2022 passed by respondent no. 3 under section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code. ii) Issued any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the orders passed by the Tehsildar in the proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for ejectment and damages in respect to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pradeep Kumar Singh, Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C., Rahul Kumar Jibareel Ahamad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) the plots in question, the order has not been given effect to. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.5, learned standing counsel for the state-respondent and the learned counsel for the respondent- gaon sabha submitted that in respect to certain plots, appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the appellate court and in respect to certain other plots, proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the Tehsildar, as such, there is no question for a direction to the authority concerned for removal of encroachment from the plots in question. They also 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, if any, 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 in respect to certain plots, appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the appellate court and in respect to certain other plots, proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is pending before the Tehsildar. 7. Under paragraph 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, provision has been made for execution of the order passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 8. In view of the pendency of the proceeding before the authorities concerned, in respect to plots in question as well as in view of the provision made in paragraph 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, the prayer made in the instant P.I.L. cannot be entertained. 9. The P.I.L. is accordingly dismissed. October 13, 2025 C.Prakash WPIL No. 3083 of 2025 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad