WPMS/1193/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 3312 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/1193/2025 on 26 June, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPMS No.998 of 2025
                                  With
                                  WPMS No.1116 of 2025 WPMS No.1223 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1117 of 2025 WPMS No.1224 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1128 of 2025 WPMS No.1230 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1131 of 2025 WPMS No.1247 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1152 of 2025 WPMS No.1259 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1159 of 2025 WPMS No.1262 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1169 of 2025 WPMS No.1263 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1193 of 2025 WPMS No.1264 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1204 of 2025 WPMS No.1265 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1205 of 2025 WPMS No.1289 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1206 of 2025 WPMS No.1293 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1207 of 2025 WPMS No.1340 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1215 of 2025 WPMS No.1342 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1219 of 2025 WPMS No.1349 of 2025
                                  WPMS No.1385 of 2025 WPMS No.1451 of 2025
                                  Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. S.R.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Devendra Pant and Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel and Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State.

Since common question of law and facts are involved in all these petitions, they are heard together and decided by this common judgment.

In all the petitions, petitioners have sought extension of time for sowing the summer paddy crop.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by an interim order of this Court, petitioners have been able to sow the summer paddy crop. Now, nothing survives in these petitions.

Learned State Counsel would submit that nothing survives to be determined in these petitions now.

In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the parties, nothing survives in these petitions. It stands disposed of accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 26.06.2025 Ravi