Judgment : This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not rectifying wrong classification over an extent of Ac.1.45 cents in Survey No.225/3A of Ibrahimpatnam, Krishna District from ‘Government land’ to ‘private land’ in the revenue records as illegal and arbitrary. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner has secured a decree for change of classification in O.S.No.851 of 2002 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada. The said decree was confirmed in A.S.No.87 of 2009 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada. S.A.No.1186 of 2011 filed by the respondents is pending before this Court. By order, dated 10.04.2013, in S.A.M.P.No.486 of 2013 in S.A.No.1187 of 2011, this Court, while vacating the interim stay granted earlier, has observed that any rectification of classification that may be made in the revenue records in pursuance of the decree of the Courts below will be subject to the result of the second appeal. The petitioner had in fact filed E.P.No.59 of 2010 under Order XXI Rule 32(2) and Section 151 CPC before the trial Court. The trial Court by order, dated 30.05.2011, allowed the EP by directing the judgment debtor i.e., respondent No.2 herein, to carry out the decree within one month with liberty to the petitioner to take necessary steps against the judgment debtor for attachment of property, if the decree is not implemented within the above-mentioned time. The present writ petition is filed with the grievance that despite the order passed in the EP, respondent No.2 has not been implementing the decree. In my opinion, the petitioner has availed a wrong remedy. When the trial Court has given liberty to him to file an application seeking attachment of the property of respondent No.2, there is no conceivable reason for him to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Ordinarily, a writ remedy cannot be availed for execution of a decree passed by a competent civil Court. A decree of a competent civil Court is meant to be executed under the provisions of CPC through various methods prescribed thereunder, including by way of attachment of properties and also arrest of the judgment debtor for disobedience of the decree. Respondent No.2 being a public servant is not expected to flout the decree. A decree of a competent civil Court is meant to be executed under the provisions of CPC through various methods prescribed thereunder, including by way of attachment of properties and also arrest of the judgment debtor for disobedience of the decree. Respondent No.2 being a public servant is not expected to flout the decree. Such a conduct cannot be viewed leniently by the executing Court. The petitioner is permitted to forthwith file an application for attachment and also other reliefs, such as, arrest of respondent No.2 for non-implementation of the decree. If such an application is filed, the executing Court shall decide the same without much loss of time after notice to respondent No.2. Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner and the direction given to the trial Court as above, the writ petition is disposed of.