Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2727 (ALL)

PARASURAM v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

WPIL/1192/2026 · 2026-05-05

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. - 1192 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri Sudhir Bharti, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha. 2. The present petition has been filed for the following relief(s): "(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to remove the encroachment/construction (Public toilet) from the premises of primary school from Araji No 452 and 453 recorded as primary school in revenue record and Panchyat Bhawan from the Araji No. 1556 recorded as Khalihan in revenue record all situated at Village Rahsujanovipatti, Tappa Khan, Pargana Sindhua Jobana, Tehsil Kasya, District Kushi Nagar and restore in original shape in the ends of justice. (ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to recover the amount from the responsible respondents / liable authority in the ends of justice." 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Janardan Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti Parasuram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) 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, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition. 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 present petition is disposed of. May 6, 2026 Ashok Kr. WPIL No. 1192 of 2026 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad