UKHC010107732026 2026:UHC:5205 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1918/2026 Noorjahan --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Mamta Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for the State. 2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the lawful sale and transportation of milk by the petitioner and further not to obstruct the petitioner in bringing fodder, khal, choker, bhusa and other cattle feed for her cows and buffaloes. b) Issue a writ, order or direction directing the respondents not to obstruct the petitioner and her family members from obtaining drinking water and other essential commodities. c) Issue a writ, order or direction restraining the respondents, their agents and subordinate officials from harassing, threatening or intimidating the petitioner and her family members.” 3. Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions. On instructions, she submits that husband of petitioner was found involved in a case of tiger poaching. It is stated that a UKHC010107732026 2026:UHC:5205 buffalo calf was killed by a tiger and, in retaliation, petitioner’s husband poisoned the carcass of buffalo calf due to which a male Tiger cub was found dead on 18.05.2026 in vicinity of the carcass of buffalo calf. 4. She also submits that a female Tiger cub was also found dead in the same area on 19.05.2026 and petitioner’s husband was arrested on 18.05.2026. She further submits that petitioner’s husband was also found involved in cases of smuggling of wildlife articles. She, however, submits that no interference is being caused in the sale and transportation of milk by petitioner nor there is any obstruction caused in petitioner’s bringing fodder, khal, choker, bhusa and other cattle feed and drinking water. 5. In view of the statement made by learned State Counsel, no further direction is needed. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 01.07.2026 Mahinder/