Allahabad High Court
WPIL/2284/2026 of KRISHNA YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 14 OTHERS on 22 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2284 of 2026 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri Azad Rai, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha. 2.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2284 of 2026
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. Sri Azad Rai, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha.
2. The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to remove the illegal encroachment made by the encroachers over plot nos. 733 and 738 recorded as Chak Marg in the revenue records relating to Village Jagdishpur, Tehsil Handia, District Prayagraj.
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 26/67 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, I am not inclined to entertain the instant petition.
5. In case the petitioner moves an application under Section 26/67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after hearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prabhakar, Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C. Krishna Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 14 Others .....Respondent(s)
6. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. September 23, 2026 Ashok Kr. WPIL No. 2284 of 2026 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad