Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81494 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15415 of 2025 Petitioner :- Deena Nath And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Bhupendra Kumar Tripathi,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: "Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent No.2 to comply the order dated 11.04.2016 passed under Section 41 of Land Revenue Act 1901 in Case No. 6543 of 2002, Shyama Charan Versus Gram Sabha and others and conclude the proceeding under section 41 of the Land Revenue Act 1901 Case No. 6543 of 2002, Shyama Charan Versus Gram Sabha and others. B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus us commanding and Respondent No.2 to directing decide the the Petitioner's applications dated 25.01.2024 and 25.02.2025 (Vide annexure Nos. 8 and 9 of the writ petition) within stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that an order dated 11.4.2016 has been passed by 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 petitioners to pursue the remedy as available to them under the law. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad