Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16393 (UTT)

INDER SINGH NEGI v. DIRECTORATE OF HORTICULTURE AND FOOD PROCESSING UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/616/2025 · 2025-12-01

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:10708 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PMS/ 6 1 6 / 2 0 2 5 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner is owner of Sanjivani Nursery at village Sorna, Dobhari, Vikasnagar, District Dehradun. In the year 2020, an order was placed for supply of grafted plants for Kaagzi Nimboo, to the said nursery. 3. According to horticulture department, plants supplied by petitioner in 2020, were found to be of different i.e., wild zamir fruit which does not have any value in the market. 4. Director, Horticulture passed an order dated 13.01.2025, whereby supply order placed with the nursery owned by petitioner, for supply of winter plants, was cancelled for financial year 2024-25. This order is put to challenge by petitioner in this writ petition. 5. Perusal of impugned order reveals that it is absolutely a non-speaking order. 6. Since order of cancellation of supply order has civil consequences to petitioner, therefore, principles of natural justice require that a reasoned order should be passed in the matter. 7. On this short point alone, the writ petition 2025:UHC:10708 is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. However, Director, Horticulture shall be at liberty to pass fresh order, as per law, after issuing show cause notice to petitioner, within thirty days. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 01.12.2025 Mahinder/