Hon'ble S.C. Chaurasia,J.:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. Injunction granted by the trial court has not been complied with. The submission of the petitioners' counsel is that non-compliance of the order passed by the trial Court by the district authorities amounts to ante thesis of the rule of law. Attention of this Court has been invited to a case reported in(2010 All. C.J. 816) Mohd. Hamja versus Addl. Civil Judge (S.D.), Lucknow and others where one of us (Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh, J) while deciding the identical controversy ruled that the trial court has got ample power to enforce its order and Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC is no substitute. Appropriate direction may be issued by the trial Court to the district authorities to enforce its order and it shall be obligatory on the part of the district authorities to enforce the same. With regard to the power conferred by Section 151 CPC, in the case of Mohd. Hamja (supra), the proposition of law has been discussed as under : "5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case reported in AIR 1966 SC 1899 (V 53 C 384), M/s. Ram Chand and Sons Sugar Mills Private Ltd. Barabanki (U.P.) Vs. Kanhayalal Bhargava and others, held that the court is competent to make suitable order under Section 151 of the CPC as may be necessary for ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of court. There is nothing in Order 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure which expressly or by necessary implication precludes the exercise of the inherent power of Court under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6. In one another case reported in 2004 (4) SCC 468, Vikas Aggarwal Vs. Anubha their Lordship of Hon'ble Supreme Court held that inherent powers of the Court under Section 151 of the code of civil procedure can always be exercised to advance interests of justice and the technicalities will have no place in such matters. Order 39 of the Code does not expressly or by necessary implication preclude the exercise of inherent power by the court under Section 151 of the CPC. Court may pass appropriate suitable order to meet out the ends of justice. 7. In one another case reported in 2004 (6) SCC 378, Vareed Jacob Vs. Order 39 of the Code does not expressly or by necessary implication preclude the exercise of inherent power by the court under Section 151 of the CPC. Court may pass appropriate suitable order to meet out the ends of justice. 7. In one another case reported in 2004 (6) SCC 378, Vareed Jacob Vs. Sosamma Geevarghese and others their Lordship of Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated the aforesaid principle and held that in appropriate matter court may pass appropriate order to meet out the ends of justice. It has been held that inherent power of the court is to do justice in addition to and complementary to powers conferred under CPC, expressly or by implication. 8. In a democratic and civilized society while dispensing justice courts posses two folds of duty. For the purpose to secure statutory and constitutional right delivery of judgment or pass an order or direction to meet the ends of justice and secondly to ensure that order passed by it while dispensing justice is implemented in its letter and spirit by the parties or authorities concerned. These are the basic tenets of rule of law in a civilized society so far as courts are concerned. Failure on the part of court to ensure the ends of justice may result into destruction of rule of law creating chaos in the society and breaking up social order. Accordingly, judicial officers or judges should always be alert to ensure that their orders are complied with by persons or authorities concerned. 9.In view of above, the court has got ample power to enforce its order. Local authorities or officers concerned may be directed to ensure the compliance of injunction granted by the Court. The court has got ample power to direct the police to ensure that no construction should be raised and parties may not remove any structure standing over the disputed land in terms of injunction granted by the Court. It should be paramount consideration of court to ensure that rule of law should be maintained and orders of the court must be complied with in its letter and spirit. Power to punish under the contempt procedure does not fulfill the requirement and in case court remain moot spectator and permit the parties or authorities to violate its order, damage may cause to parties and may suffer from irreparable loss and injury. Power to punish under the contempt procedure does not fulfill the requirement and in case court remain moot spectator and permit the parties or authorities to violate its order, damage may cause to parties and may suffer from irreparable loss and injury. Accordingly trial court should have issued appropriate direction or order to the local authorities and administration to ensure compliance of injunction granted by it in pursuance to inherent power conferred by Section 151 of the CPC and it shall be obligatory for the State authorities to comply with such order." In view of above, the trial Court has ample power to enforce its order by issuing appropriate direction to the district authorities. Needless to say that in case the district authorities do not implement the order passed by the trial court, the latter has ample power to refer the matter to this Court. We reiterate the proposition of law discussed in the case of Mohd. Hamja(supra) and permit the petitioner to approach the trial Court by moving appropriate application. The trial court shall ensure that the order passed by it is complied with in its letter and spirit by the district authorities. It shall be obligatory on the part of the district authorities to implement the order passed by the trial court. Attention of this Court has been invited to the order dated 14.7.2011 (Annexure-6). In case the private respondents have got any grievance against the order passed by the trial Court, then option is open to them to approach the higher forum like revisional or appellate jurisdiction but there shall not be any connivance between the private respondents and the district authorities in complying the order passed by the trial Court. Non-compliance of the court's order by the district authorities is a symptom which shows the breakage of the constitutional machinery. We hope and trust that the district authorities including the Superintendent of Police, Lucknow shall enforce the order passed by the trial Court in its letter and spirit. With aforesaid observation, without entering into the merit of the controversy, we dispose of the writ petition finally with liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial court along with a certified copy of this judgment to ventilate their grievance. The trial court shall proceed to enforce its order on day to day basis in accordance with law. With aforesaid observation, without entering into the merit of the controversy, we dispose of the writ petition finally with liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial court along with a certified copy of this judgment to ventilate their grievance. The trial court shall proceed to enforce its order on day to day basis in accordance with law. For any reason whatsoever, in case the district authorities do not abide by the order passed by the trial court, we give liberty to the petitioners to approach this court again. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Since we have not entered into merit of the controversy, issuance of notice to the private respondents is dispensed with.