Public Interest Litigation cannot be used to challenge valid judicial orders when adequate remedies are available, reaffirming adherence to procedural law in land exchange matters.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Kumar Rai, J.

Heard Sanjay Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent No. 4/Gaon Sabha.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Plot No. 452-ka area 0.4680 hectare is recorded as Dahar Class 6 (1) Category submerged land, plot No. 452-kha area. 0.8860 hectare is recorded as Banjar and plot No. 452-ga area 0.7080 hectare is recorded as Pond Class 6 (1) Category submerged land in the revenue record. The aforementioned lands are situated in Village-Karauli Bangar, Pargana and Tehsil-Jewar and District-Gautambudh Nagar. It is further mentioned in the petition that private respondent Nos. 5 to 12 have illegally raised construction in the disputed plot No. 452- ga. There is no mention of plot No. 452 Kha in the petition. Petitioner has already preferred a Public Interest Litigation No. 49755 of 2017, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 27.10.2017 directing Tahsildar to inquire the matter and decide the dispute in accordance with law. On the basis of the order dated 27.10.2017 passed by this Court proceeding under Sections 67 (1) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been initiated against the private respondent No. 5. Respondent No. 5 initiated a proceeding for exchange as provided under Section 101 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 to exchange his Bhumidhari Plot No. 469from plot No. 452 kha whichis recorded as banjar land. The aforementioned exchange proceeding was decided by the Court by order dated 5.10.2018, directing for exchange of petitioner's Bhumidhari Plot No. 469 from Banjar Plot No. 452 Kha. The proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 registered against the private respondent Nos. 5 to 12 has been decided by order dated 22.10.2018, dropping the proceeding against private respondent. Hence, this Public Interest Litigation on behalf of petitioner for the following relief:

"(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22 October 2018 passed by respondent no. 3 in Case No.00174/2018 (Computerized Case No. T 201811270300174) Gram Sabha v. Udaivir and others, under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code-2006, Mauja- Karauli Bangar, Pargana & Tehsil- Jevar, District-Gautam Budh Nagar .

(b) Issue a Writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 05 October 2018 passed by respondent no. 2 in Case No. 04206/2018 (Computerized Case Pargana and 201811270304206) Jaypal Singh v. State, Under Section 101 Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code-2006.

(c) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove the illegal possession of the respondent nos. 5 to 12 from the disputed plot."

3. This court has directed the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instruction in the matter vide order dated 03.12.2018. After receiving the instruction, this Court by subsequent order dated 10.01.2019, directing the Collector Gautam Bhud Nagar to file a personal affidavit as well as counter affidavit in the matter.

4. In compliance of the order of this Court, Collector, Gautam Bhud Nagar has filed a personal affidavit as well as counter affidavit in the matter.

5. Petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit in reply to the counter affidavit filed by the State.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that plot in dispute is public utility plot i.e. dahar and pond, as such, proceeding for exchange cannot be allowed by the Court. He further submitted t