HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 528 of 2025 (M/S) M/S Uttarakhand High Tech Nursery Banpur ...Petitioner Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others …..... Respondents Present : Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Devendra Pant, Standing Counsel for the State/respondents. JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- “(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing of the impugned allotment cancellation order dated 7th February 2025 passed by the Director Horticulture i.e. respondent no.2 (Annexure No.4) to the instant writ petition. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner for supplying the plants in pursuance to the allotment orders dated 07/01/2025 as well as 22/01/2025 issued to the petitioner. (iii) to issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit, just and proper in the circumstances of the case as also in the interest of justice. (iv) allow the writ petition with costs.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents- authorities had once agreed to purchase plants and trees from the petitioner’s nursery, which were to be supplied in the entire State. The petitioner did supply also. But suddenly, by the impugned order dated 07.02.2025, which is Annexure No.4 to the writ petition, allotment has been cancelled. 2 4. If respondents had once agreed to purchase plants and trees and now, they are not willing to do so, perhaps it may not give rise a cause to file a writ petition. 5. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that at least the respondents should pay the price of those plants which had been supplied by the petitioner. For it, the petitioner may very well approach the respondents and even if it is not paid and disputed, he is free to file a civil suit. But, for the relief sought, this Court does not see any reason to entertain the instant petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself. 6. The petition is dismissed in limine. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 24.02.2025 Sanjay