MS PRAMOD KUMAR GOVT CONTRACTOR AND GENERAL ORDER SUPPLIER v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPMB/900/2025 · 2025-10-28
Alok Mahra, Ravindra Maithani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14296 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14296 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D2- 23
WPMB No.900 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Additional C.S.C. for the State. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the respondent nos.2 and 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has rendered infructuous because the grievance has already been redressed. The writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infrucuous.
(Alok Mahra J.) (Ravindra Maithani J.)
28.10.2025 RV