Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67197 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13183 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madan Mohan,Parmeshwar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh 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: "(a) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Respondent no.2 to fix the boundary of plot No. 148 in pursuance of order dated 12.03.2020 passed in Case no. T201916670501731 (Sushil Kumar Vs. Ram Asre Pathak) filed under Section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006, before Respondent No. 2 in a stipulated time as fix by this Hon'ble Court. (b) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure No.5) pending before Respondent no.2 in nce of order dated 12.03.2020 passed in case pursuance no. T 201916670501731 on the application of petitioner filed under section 24 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that an order dated 12.03.2020 has been passed by the respondent No.2, 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 pursue the remedy as available to him under law. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad