WPMS/3453/2016
2025 Latest Caselaw 1490 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/3453/2016 on 3 January, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                                                                                     2025:UHC:54
                Office N ot e s,
              r e por t s, or de r s
              or pr oce e dings
SL.
       Date     or dir e ct ions                       COURT'S OR JUD GE'S ORD ERS
N o.
              a nd Re gist r a r 's
                  or de r w it h
                  Signa t ur e s
                                       WPMS No. 3453 of 2016
                                       With
                                       WPMS No. 1338 of 2017
                                       U   Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

None appears for the petitioner(s). Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel with Mr. K.S. Mehta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand.

2. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, therefore they are heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3453 of 2016 alone are being considered and discussed.

2. Petitioner has challenged an order dated 16.09.2016, passed by Assistant Collector, First Class, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in Revenue Suit No. 22/137 of 20 03-2004. By the said order, prayer for impleadment made by respondent No. 3, was allowed by trial Court. The said order has been challenged by petitioner on the ground that respondent No. 3 could not have been impleaded as he is neither a necessary nor a proper party in the suit.

3. Since there was no representation for the parties, therefore, learned State Counsel was asked to enquire as to whether aforesaid suit has been decided or not.

2025:UHC:54

4. Today, on instructions, Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tiwari, learned State Counsel submits that as per instructions received, the aforesaid suit was decided based on compromise between the parties on 02.12.2021.

5. After decision in the suit, the relief claimed in this writ petition do not survive.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 03.01.2025 Mahinder/

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

MAHINDER SINGH 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923 c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BA BA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.01.04 11:27:25 +05'30'