Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78882 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15006 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rinku Devi Respondent :- State Of Up And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey 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: "Issue a writ order or directing in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondent no. 3 to ensure the compliance of the 27.03.2025 as passed by order dated him and also demarcated the land on the basis of kurras and field book in respect of arazi no. 13 area 2.351 hectare situated in Chakhani Dukhi Mishra, Tappa-Haweli, Pargana-Sidhua Jobna, Tehsil-Temkuhiraj, District-Kushinagar, within stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a decree has been passed under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in his favour on 27.3.2025 and the same has not been given effect to. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that order passed under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is an executable order as the provisions of C.P.C. will apply to the proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. It has been further submitted 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 petitioner has 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 her, under the law. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad