Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53339 (ALL)

SONU KUMAR AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

WRIC/14123/2025 · 2025-05-13

Manish Kumar Nigam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79197 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14123 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sonu Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Bhushan Dubey,Shailesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "(A). Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to remove the encroachment made by respondent No. 6 and 7 by way of constructing a wall over the Arazi No. 213kha area 4.298 Hectare. situated at concerned Gaon Sabha of the village Mundera Thakurai, which is recorded as the land of shreni 6 (2) in the Revenue Record (B). Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to direct the respondent No. 6 and 7 not to make any hindrance using of the way by any obstruction to the petitioners and other villagers. be paid easily." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent no. 6 & 7 has encroached upon the road of village and in this regard various complaints have been made by the petitioner as well as other villagers. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that for removal of obstruction, the petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an application under Section 26 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 in view of the judgment passed by this Court in Jahar Singh v. State of U.P. reported in 2017(4) ADJ 619 as well as in Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ 226. 5. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition. 6. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 26 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Nitika Sri. (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIKA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad