HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 28092 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shridhar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2, Assistant Collector (First Class)/ Tehsildar Judicial Pindara, Varanasi to comply with the order dated 24.8.2020 passed by respondent no.2 in case no. 5/29/2015 computerized case no. 20151470025129 report Lekhpal Vs. Doodh Nath and others under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act 1950 for evicttion of respondent nos. 3 to 7 from arazi no. 186 area 0.200 hectare Bhita situated in Village Barawan Pargana Kolasala Tehsil Pindara, District Varanasi as well as recovery of Rs. 4990/- as damages and Rs. 5/- as execution expresses from them expeditiously if possible within a period of three months or as fixed by the Hon'ble Court." 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the order for eviction and damages passed under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act in respect to the plot no. 186 which is recorded as bhita, the order has not been given effect. He submitted that application has been filed before the authorities for implementation of the order passed under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act but no steps has been taken by the authorities, as such, direction be issued to the authority to consider the petitioner's application for execution of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Kirti Singh, Sumod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Somaru Prasad Verma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) order passed under Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. 4. I have considered the argument advanced by learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that order for eviction and damages has been passed by Tehsildar in respect to plot in question which has been maintained in revision. 6. Under para 460 of the U.P. Revenue Court Manual, procedure has been prescribed for implementation/ execution of the order passed under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 which was earlier Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, as such, writ petition for implementation/ execution of the order cannot be entertained. 7. No interference is required in the matter. 8. Writ petition is dismissed with observation that proper proceeding can be initiated for implementation/ execution of the final order passed in the proceeding under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006/ Section 122-B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act in accordance with law. September 16, 2026 Vandana Y. WRIC No. 28092 of 2026 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad