Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5429 (UTT)

ANJU v. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/ COLLECTOR HARIDWAR

WPMS/1243/2026 · 2026-05-14

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3697 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No.1243 of 2026 Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Pramod Kr. Belwal with Mr. Bharat Singh, learned Counsel for petitioner. 2. Mr. V.D. Bisen, learned Addl. CSC for the State. 3. Petitioner is aggrieved by slow pace of proceedings of Execution Case No.6 of 2021 (Smt. Anju v. Smt. Bala Devi) pending before learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Roorkee, District Haridwar. 4. It is contended by learned Counsel for petitioner that despite pendency of execution application, decree is not being executed by the learned Trial Court. 5. This Court is of the opinion that this issue cannot fall for consideration under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is, accordingly, not maintainable before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. At this, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw present writ petition enabling him to file a proper petition before this Court. 7. Permission granted. 8. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn. 9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 14.05.2026 R.Dang 2026:UHC:3697