Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56580 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11331 of 2025 Petitioner :- Gayatri Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jigyasa Singh,Navin Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the name of the petitioner in the array of parties during the course of the day. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. This petition has been filed for the following relief: "a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus emanded directing respondents to execute the order dated 13.9.2018 passed by the respondent no.2 in demarcation suit no. 07722/2018 (Mohan vs Umashankar and others) under section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 regarding the Araji No. 569 m area 0.379 Hectare of village Hata tappa Dhu. V. Tehsil Tamkuhiraj District Kushinagar. (annexed as Annexure No. 2). b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to respondent no. 2 and 4 to decide the representations dated 4.2.2025 and 1.3.2025 respectively given by the petitioner." 4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that on an application moved by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner, an order has been passed on 13.9.2018 under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 but the same has not been implemented. 5. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that in view of the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in case of Manbhavati v. State of U.P. and others reported in 2020 1 AWC 789A and Writ C No. 7863 of 2018 (Brij Bhushan Rai v. State of U.P. and 6 others) the writ petition is not maintainable for execution of orders passed by Revenue Court. It has been further submitted by learned Standing Counsel that in view of provisions of paragraph no. 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, the petitioners have remedy for getting the order implemented. For ready reference, paragraph no. 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, is quoted as under: "460. Execution of decree and order- (1) The decree or order passed under the Code or the Rules framed under the Code shall, mutatis mutandis, be executed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter V. (2) The Assistant Collector/Tahsildar passing the order for eviction or recovery of any amount of damages or compensation under the provisions of Section 67 of the Code shall get the order executed and in execution of the order he shall, mutatis mutandis, follow the procedure laid down in paragraphs 137 and 138." 6. In view of the same, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. 7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 17.4.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad