Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6858 (UTT)

GOKUL SINGH BUNGLA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPSS/1533/2026 · 2026-06-15

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:4794 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS No.1533 of 2026 Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. B.S. Koranga, learned B.H. for the State- respondent nos.1 and 3. 3. Mr. Prateek Tripathi, learned Counsel for respondent no.2. 4. Mr. Rajendra Arya, learned Counsel i/b Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned Counsel for respondent no.4. 5. In this writ petition filed by petitioner, it was submitted by petitioner that he wants to press the Relief Clause No.(i) whereby he only wanted his representation dated 07.06.2026 to be decided. 6. Today, on instructions, it is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the said representation has already been decided by respondent no.2 vide order dated 10.06.2026 i.e. the date on which he served Dasti notice upon respondent no.2. Hence, he wants to challenge the order of rejection of representation in a separate writ petition. 7. In such view of the matter, present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is dismissed as infructuous. Petitioner, however, would be at liberty to challenge the order dated 10.06.2026 by which representation dated 07.06.2026 has been rejected, by filing a fresh writ petition. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 15.06.2026 R.Dang