Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90015 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16947 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohd Kayyum Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Singh,Mazhar Ullah 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 of mandamus order on direction the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give the possession of the petitioner land comprising of the Gata no. 127 area 1/4 of 0.2620 Hectare from the respondent no.2, in pursuance of the Order dated 6.09.2024, passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Mirganj, District Bareilly Mandal Bareilly, In Case no. 2129 of 2024, (Mo. Kayyum Mobeen and others) (Computerized case no.T20241213060219 Under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a decree has been passed under Section 134 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 in his favour and the same has not been implemented. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that order passed under Section 134 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 134 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 petitioners to pursue the remedy as available to them. Order Date :- 26.5.2025/Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.] Digitally signed by :- RISHABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad