Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65993 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13061 of 2025 Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lakshman Prasad Ojha,Praveen Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Azad Rai,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: "I. Issue Writ, or Order in the Nature of Mandamus Directing Commanding Respondent No.2 (District Magistrate Prayagraj to Decide the Application dated 03.03.2025 moved by the petitioner in the light of the order dated 20.12.2017 [P.I.L. No. 56855 of 2017 Kripa Shankar Pandey Versus State of U.P. & Others], And in Light of Order dated 22.10.2018 [Contempt Application (Civil) No. 4931 of 2018 Kripa Shankar Pandey Versus Devendra Tehsildar Soraon] And in the Light of Order dated 27.02.2020 [Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1369 of 2020 Kripa Shankar Pandey Versus Ajit Kumar Tehsildar]. II. Issue, Writ Or Order in the Nature of Mandamus Directing Commanding Respondents No. 2 To 5 to get removed the Illegal Encroachment done by Respondent No. 6 To 10 over Arazi No. 100 Area 0.4150 Hectare [Recorded As Road] situated at Village Devapur, Pargana Nawab Ganj, Tehsil Soraon District Prayagraj." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aforementioned orders have been passed by the respondent- Authority, but the same have 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 pursue the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 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