IMPORTANT POINT
The court reinforced that statutory remedies must be exhausted before invoking the High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction in matters of land encroachment.

JUDGMENT :

Manish Kumar Nigam, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This Public Interest Litigation has been filed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent-authorities to take appropriate action in view of Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for removal of illegal encroachment from the plot Nos. 163, 167, which are recorded as ''Garaha'' and plot No. 165, which is reserved for ''Holika Dahan'' respectively situated in Village-Hamjapur, Tehsil-Sadar, District-Jaunpur and to restore the same in its original form within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner claims himself to be a social worker and resident of Village-Hamjapur, Tehsil-Sadar, Districtt-Jaunpur. His grievance is that during the consolidation proceedings, Gata Nos. 163 and 167 are recorded as Garaha (pond) and Gata No. 165 is reserved for Holika Dahan. The aforesaid land of Gata Nos. 163, 167 and 165 have been encroached by respondent No. 9 to 15. It is further claimed that in order to get the encroachments removed by the respondent Nos. 9 to 15, application as well as representation have been moved by the petitioner to the Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh, concerned S.D.M and concerned Tehsildar. It has been further claimed that the local Lekhpal in collusion with the private respondents has submitted a false and fake report before the authorities. It has also been stated that the respondent authorities are empowered under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 to get the illegal encroachment removed and, therefore, the present PIL has been filed for the relief mentioned above.

4. Contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that despite complaint being made with the authorities concerned, the respondents have failed to remove the encroachment made by respondent Nos. 9 to 15 from the public utility land.

5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel contended that the petitioner can approach the authority by filing an application under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which provides the statutory remedy to the petitioner and the present PIL as framed may not be entertained for the aforesaid reason.

6. Considering the rival submissions, it is useful to look into the provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. In this regard, Section 67 of the Revenue Code, 2006 is quoted as under :

67. Power to prevent (damage), misappropriation and wrongful occupation of (Gram Panchayat) (Property).-(1) Where any property entrusted or deemed to be entrusted under the provisions of this Code to a [Gram Panchayat] or other local authority is damaged or misappropriated, or where any [Gram Panchayat] or other authority is entitled to take possession of any land under the provisions of this Code and such land is occupied otherwise than in accordance with the said provisions, the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti or other authority or the Lekhpal concerned, as the case may be, shall inform the [Assistant Collector] concerned in the manner prescribed.

[(2) Where from the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Assistant Collector is satisfied that any property referred to in sub-section (1) has been damaged or misappropriated, or any person is in occupation of any land referred to in that sub-section in contravention of the provisions of this Code, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show-cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation or wrongful occupation not exceeding the amount specified in the notice be not recovered from him and why he should not be evicted from such land.]

(3) If the person to whom a notice has been issued under sub-section (2) fails to show-cause within the time specified in the notice or within such extended time as the [Assistant Collector] may allow in this behalf, or if the cause shown is found to be insufficient, the [Assistant Collector] may direct that such person shall be