The Allahabad High Court has clarified that orders passed under Section 67(3) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for eviction from land or recovery of compensation cannot be subjected to the lengthy execution procedure contemplated under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
A Division Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla held that Section 67 proceedings are summary in nature and that the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the Rules of 2016 already provide the mechanism for enforcing such orders.
Background of the Case
The ruling came in Pooja Devi v. State of U.P. Through Secretary, Revenue, Lucknow and 10 Others, a Public Interest Litigation concerning a chak marg in village Dehli Bazar, Pargana Brausha, Tehsil Baldirai, District Sultanpur.
The petitioner had earlier approached the High Court through PIL No. 847 of 2025, seeking steps for construction of the chak marg and protection of the common rights of villagers. That petition was disposed of on August 20, 2025, with directions for completion of pending proceedings and appeals within the statutory period of 90 days.
By the time of the present proceedings, the cases had been decided and proceedings for removal of the encroachment were underway. The Court noted that the petitioner was, in substance, seeking enforcement of the orders passed under Section 67 because the chak marg could not be constructed or repaired until the occupation was removed.
Court’s Observation
The Bench examined whether authorities were required to follow the lengthy execution procedure under Order XXI CPC. It found that Section 67 itself provides for eviction, including the use of necessary force where the statutory conditions are satisfied. It also permits recovery of compensation as arrears of land revenue.
The Court emphasised that proceedings under Section 67 are summary proceedings and therefore their enforcement cannot ordinarily become a prolonged process similar to execution of a regular civil decree.
"The proceedings under Section 67 of the Code, 2006 not being akin to regular suit proceedings but being summary in nature, it is highly incongruous that the long drawn procedure prescribed in Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 should be followed for its execution of orders passed thereunder."
The Bench further held that the reference to Order XXI CPC in Paragraph 137 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual has a limited purpose. It may govern the processing of an execution application, but it does not bring the entire Order XXI procedure into Section 67 proceedings.
The Court also noted that where compensation is ordered, the U.P. Revenue Code provides a separate recovery mechanism through the provisions dealing with arrears of land revenue.
Decision
The High Court held that enforcement of orders under Section 67(3) must be carried out in accordance with Section 67, the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 and the relevant recovery provisions of the Code. The long-drawn execution procedure under Order XXI CPC is not applicable.
The Bench also observed that the State Government would be better advised to revisit Paragraph 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual to bring it in line with the U.P. Revenue Code and the 2016 Rules.
The petition was accordingly disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedies prescribed for execution of orders passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code.
A copy of the judgment was directed to be sent to the concerned senior Revenue officials and the Legal Remembrancer, Uttar Pradesh, for necessary action.
Case Details
Case Title: Pooja Devi v. State of U.P. Through Secretary, Revenue, Lucknow and 10 Others
Case Number: Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 560 of 2026
Judges: Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla
Decision Date: September 1, 2026
