SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 21 WPMS No.1974 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Advocate for the respondent no.4. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Administration to issue Show Cause Notice in accordance with law to the petitioner Society as and when they required to visit the premises of the Uttaranchal University. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the District Administration to initiate the proceedings in accordance with law to vest the said Tea Estate Land being Khasra No.15/0.6400, Khasra No.16/0.4450, in total 1.0850 hect. of the Tea Company namely Dehradun Tea Company, Gram Arkeriya Grant, Tehsil Sadar, District Dehradun. (iii) Pass any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. When this matter was taken up, on behalf of the respondent no.4, it was argued that without making the respondent no.4 party, relief no.2 has been claimed for vesting the property pertaining to the respondent no.4 in the State Government. It is, thereafter, the respondent no.4 was impleaded as a party. This Court has not directed the respondents to file counter affidavit, but the respondent no.4 has already filed the counter affidavit. Today, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he withdraws the prayer no.2, which relates to initiate the proceedings in accordance with law to vest the property of the respondent no.4. Since prayer no.2 has been withdrawn, the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, qua prayer no.2, above. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Officers of District Administration simply barge in the petitioner’s university, which creates a sense of panic amongst the students and the parents. Therefore, the petitioner only requests that the respondents’ Administrative Authority may be directed to inform the petitioner in writing, in advance, of any of their visit to the premises of the petitioner’ university. Learned State Counsel submits that simply the Administrative Authority would not enter into the premises, but he assures that in future, whenever the Administrative Authority has to visit to the petitioner’s university, they would intimate in writing or through electronic mode in advance to the petitioner. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned State Counsel. In view of the statement given by learned State Counsel, nothing survives in this writ petition. It stands disposed of, accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 14.08.2025 RV