HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 666 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Mr. A.K. Malviya, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. R.C. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, learned Counsel for respondent- Gaon Sabha. 2. The instant public interest litigation has been filed for the following relief:- "To issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to remove illegal encroachment from Araji No. 1062Sa comprising area 31.4170 hectare recorded as Balu in the revenue record, situated in Village- Diyara Jeevpur, Tehsil Jamaniya, District Ghazipur being used in public utility land from the private respondent nos. 6 to 61 in pursuance to the order dated 7.9.2022 passed by this Hon'ble Court as well as eviction order dated 20.10.2023 passed by the respondent no.4, within stipulated period." 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in spite of the order for ejectment and damages passed by Tehsildar which has been maintained in appeal under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as well as in the order of this Court by way of dismissing the petition of private respondents, the order has not been given effect on spot. He submitted that on the application of petitioner, twice the Committee was constituted by the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arpit Malviya, Awadhesh Kumar Malviya Counsel for Respondent(s) : Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi, C.S.C. Dayaramdas And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 60 Others .....Respondent(s) authorities but till date no action has been taken by the authorities. He submitted that authorities be directed to take immediate steps for eviction of unauthorized occupant from the plot in question. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the records. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that order for ejectment and damages has been passed by Tehsildar which has been maintained in appeal as well as in the order passed by this Court while dismissing the petition of private respondents. 6. Under para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual, the provision has been prescribed for the implementation/ execution of the order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, as such, the public interest litigation cannot be entertained for execution of the order passed under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 7. No interference is required. 8. The public interest litigation is dismissed with observation that appropriate proceeding as provided under Para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual, can be initiated in accordance with law. March 19, 2026 Vandana Y. WPIL No. 666 of 2026 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad