JUDGMENT Hon’ble Saeed-Uz-Zaman Siddiqi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned standing counsel and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to get implemented the order dated 20.12.1976, passed by District Judge, Gonda as well as order dated 3.9.2009, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were served with the notice under Section 10 (2) of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), which was ultimately settled vide judgment and order dated 20.12.1976 passed in Revenue Appeal No. 82 of 1976, by the then District Judge, Gonda. By the impugned order the notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act was discharged, but the order was not implemented. The aggrieved petitioners applied to the Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda under Section 13(1) of the Act which was decided vide judgment and order dated 3.9.2009, by which the Revenue Authorities of District Gonda were directed to implement the order passed by the then District Judge on 20.12.1976, contained as Annexure No. 2. Feeling aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the opposite parties, the petitioners have knocked the door of this Court. 3. Learned Standing Counsel is also surprised ‘how the orders of the final appellate courts are not being implemented’ by the Revenue Authorities. As per request made by learned counsels for the parties the writ petition is disposed of finally. It is further made clear that implementation, execution and enforcement of orders passed by judicial or administrative authorities is the essential point, turning point and crossing point of the entire constitutional system otherwise, the constitution of India would be reduced to a holy book, which is perfect in a moral sense, pure in heart and associated with the spirit of nationalism but hollow, unsound, unreal and groove in existence. The nation cannot survive unless its aims and objects are being and held to by the administrative mechanism which are tools to keep a nation alive. India is a fine democracy, as ample laws by which it is being called a “welfare state”. The nation cannot survive unless its aims and objects are being and held to by the administrative mechanism which are tools to keep a nation alive. India is a fine democracy, as ample laws by which it is being called a “welfare state”. Each and every authority and public servants are bound to keep their fingers tight on the nerve of the society so as to converting the Indian Democracy into a ridicule, into mockery. It is really pathetic that administrative authorities keep their fingers of the right hand on the political masters and spare fingers only on the left hand of the society, which is eroding nationalism, majesty of the State and dignity of a public servant. A nation cannot survive by serving few people. For survival of the nation it is necessary that instrument of State machinery must be vigilant and active enough to ensure that this country remains a welfare State and flourishes. 4. If a judicial or administrative authority moves with a slow motion while implementing its own orders and ensuring that the orders passed by it are implemented, such authorities lack judicial sense, which is of divine nature. In this case the order of the year 1976, which has been reiterated vide order dated 30.09.2009 has yet not been implemented. When an aggrieved person has come to this Court, which is not easily approachable or assessable for ordinary fellow citizens, it goes on to show that he must have approached the concerned authorities, but in vain. The District Magistrate has to find out as to what were the ulterior motives of the revenue authorities concerned, who have denied implementation of the orders of the final Court under the Act and compelled the petitioner to approach this Court. The agony faced by the petitioner can well be gauged by the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vishnu Awatar etc. v. Shiv Autar and others, AIR 1980 SC 1575 , has held as under : “After all, our District Courts are easier of access for litigants, and the High Courts, especially in large States like Uttar Pradesh, are ‘untouchable’ and ‘unapproachable’ for agrestic populations and even urban middle classes. Nor is there ground to distrust the District Judges. A hierarchy of courts built upon a heritage of disbelief in inferiors has an imperial flavour. Nor is there ground to distrust the District Judges. A hierarchy of courts built upon a heritage of disbelief in inferiors has an imperial flavour. If we suspect a Munsif and put a District Judge over him for everything he does, if we distrust a district Judge and vest the High Court with pervasive supervision, if we be skeptical about the High Courts and watch meticulously over all their orders, the System will break down as its morale will crack up. A psychic communicable disease of suspicion, skepticism and servility cannot make for the health of the judicial system. If the Supreme Court has a super-Supreme Court above it, it is doubtful whether many of its verdicts will survive, judging by the frequency with which it differs from itself.” 5. Recently, in Gurdev Kaur and others v. Kaki and others, AIR 2006 SC 1975 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has given a note of caution to such orders which are stigmatic on the justice delivery system in the mind of the public at large and has held; “Judges must administer law according to the provisions of law. It is the bounden duty of Judges to discern legislative intention in the process of adjudication. Justice administered according to individual’s whim, desire inclination and notice of justice would lead to confusion, disorder and chaos.” Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the opposite parties to implement the order passed in Revenue Appeal No. 82 of 1976 by District Judge, Gonda dated 20.12.1976 with thirty days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Learned District Magistrate concerned is further directed to hold an enquiry and find out as to why the petitioners were compelled to knock the door of this Court and he shall take effective action against the guilty and shall report to this Court within thirty days from the receipt of the copy of this order. The District Magistrate shall be officially answerable and personally responsible to this court for implementation of this order. —————