Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5965 (UTT)

ARVIND KUMAR JAIN v. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR FIRMS SOCIETY AND CHITS DEHRADUN

WPMS/2486/2022 · 2026-05-27

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:4217 SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.2486 of 2022 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (through V.C.) Mr. M.C. Pant, learned counsel for petitioner. 2. Mr. Devendra Pant, learned Standing Counsel with Ms. Swati Verma, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Sagar Kothari, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 4. Mr. Vivek Pathak, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5. 5. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 22.04.2022 and order dated 30.06.2022 (Annexure Nos.1 and 2 to the writ petition), as well as resolution dated 02.12.2018 (Annexure No.15 to the writ petition), by which, the voting rights of petitioner was seized by respondent Nos.3 to 5. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that during the pendency of present writ petition, a settlement has arrived at between the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 to 5 on 18.05.2026, whereby, voting rights of petitioner has been restored. 7. The settlement arrived at between the parties has been brought on record by the petitioner by filing misc. application (IA/ 12/2026), which is taken on record. 2026:UHC:4217 Petitioner sought a direction to decide the writ petition in terms of the settlement arrived at between petitioner and respondent Nos.3 to 5. 8. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5 do not dispute the aforesaid settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 to 5. 9. Since, the settlement has arrived at between the parties, therefore, there is no need to pass any order in respect of the merits of the writ petition. 10. At this, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he wants to withdraw the present writ petition in view of the subsequent development as stated above. 11. In view of the aforesaid settlement, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 12. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 27.05.2026 PN