Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12338 (ALL)

MEERA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

WPIL/2384/2026 · 2026-10-06

Arun Kumar

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2384 of 2026 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents State and Sri Prem Bahadur Singh, holding brief of Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha 2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the concerned respondents to remove the illegal encroachment of Land Gata No. 255 area 0.042 hectare registered as Pokhari (Pond) and Gata No. 257 area 0.2020 hectare which is registered as Usar in the revenue records and which comes under category no. 6 situated in Village Changaipur, Tehsil Sagri, District Azamgarh from the Encroacher i.e., respondent no. 6." 3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an application under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Amaruddin Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and 5 others, passed in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No.655 of 2026, decided on 18.03.2026, upholding the Coordinate Bench decision of this Court in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2023 (12) ADJ 226. 4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant petition. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kailash Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla Meera Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties, in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. October 7, 2026 Anil WPIL No. 2384 of 2026 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad