HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 983 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 3 and Sri Prem Bahadur Singh, holding brief of Sri Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4. 2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.3 to compliance his own order dated 5.6.2025 passed in Case No.460 of 2025, under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been passed against the encroachers for their eviction and recovery of damages. However, no further action has been taken to get the land in question vacated. The present petition is in fact for implementation of the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 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 petitioner has remedy for getting the order implemented. For ready reference, paragraph no. 460 of the U.P. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Rameshwar Prasad Shukla Virendra Chauhan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 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, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedy as available to him under law. April 20, 2026 Anil WPIL No. 983 of 2026 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad