Dhruv Narain Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 5 Others

Court No. -3 Case :-WRIT -C No. -9687 of 2023 Petitioner :-Dhruv Narain Tiwari Respondent :-State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue, Govt. U.P. Lucknow And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :-Rudra Pratap Pal Counsel for Respondent :-C.S.C.,Pankaj Gupta Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. Present petition has been preferred by the petitioner for implementation of the order dated 18.07.2023 passed by respondent no.4 Tehsildar, Tehsil Payagpur, District Bahraich in Case No.2653/2014 (Computerized Case No.T20140815012653 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Ram Sagar), under Section 122 of U.P. Z.A.L.R. Act. By virtue of Section 4 (16), U.P. Revenue Code,2006 is defined as under:-"Revenue Court" means all or any of the following authorities (that is to say) the Board and all Members thereof, Commissioners, Additional Commissioners, Collectors, Additional Collectors, [Chief Revenue Officers, Assistant Collectors, Settlement Officers, Assistant Settlement Officers, Record Officers, Assistant Record Officers, Tahsildar, Tahsildars (Judicial) and Naib-Tahsildars;] The question is as to whether a writ petition would be maintainable for the execution of an order passed by the revenue court. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State has pointed out that there is a complete mechanism for the execution of the orders passed by the revenue courts under Section 214 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 read with para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual. The respective provisions are extracted hereunder:-

¶214Applicability of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Limitation Act,1963-Unless otherwise expressly provided by or under this Code, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply to every suit, application or proceedings under this Code.

¶460Execution 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. In the case of Ajab Lal vs. Rakesh Kumar Mishra & Ors. reported in 2007 Alld. pg 158, the position as regards execution of orders passed by the Revenue courts was dealt with and it was held that the revenue courts itself are possessed with such a jurisdiction. On the same very analogy, we permit the petitioner to institute an appropriate proceeding before the opposite party no. 4 or the appropriate authority along with certified copy of this order and in case any such proceedings are instituted, the competent court shall proceed in accordance with law and finalize the execution proceedings within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt/production of certified copy of this order, provided there is no legal impediment. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Order Date :- 6.11.2023 Arti/- [Manish Kumar,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench