Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64822 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11771 of 2025 Petitioner :- Surendra Singh Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Nath Kesharwani Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This petition has been filed for the following relief: "1) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to demarcate and make measurement of the petitioner's arazi no.992/0.231 hectares situated in village- Bhataura, Pargana & Tehsil Jaswant Nagar, District- Etawah in accordance with order dated 20.10.2023 passed by the respondent no.3, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jaswant Nagar, District-Etawah in case no.389/2019 (T-201903220300389) (Surendra Vs. Shri Lal and others) under section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code- 2006, (Annexures No. 2 to the writ petition)." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an order dated 20.10.2023 has been passed by the respondent No. 3, but the same has not been given effect to. 4. 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." 5. In view of the same, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. 6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the Authority concerned. In case, such an application is moved by the petitioner within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the Authority concerned in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months provided that there is no other legal impediment. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad