CHARANJEET SINGH vs CHIEF AGRICULTURE OFFICER Advocate - C.S.C. — WPMS/612/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010037932026

Filing Number

WPMS/2015/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

WPMS/612/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

MISC MATTERS ( 47 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 30-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHARANJEET SINGH

    Adv. BALVINDER SINGH

  2. 2.GURMAIL SINGH

  3. 3.MANJEET SINGH

  4. 4.KEWAL SINGH

  5. 5.CHARAN KAUR

  6. 6.DALVEER SINGH

  7. 7.BALKAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHIEF AGRICULTURE OFFICER Advocate - C.S.C.

  2. 2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Uttarakhand quashed the District Magistrate's order restricting summer paddy cultivation in non-waterlogged fields, holding that such restrictions require statutory sanction and cannot be imposed without legal authority. The court allowed all writ petitions, permitting farmers to sow summer paddy in their fields based on their choice, regardless of waterlogging status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  4. 18-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/612/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Uttarakhand quashed the District Magistrate's order restricting summer paddy cultivation in non-waterlogged fields, holding that such restrictions require statutory sanction and cannot be imposed without legal authority. The court allowed all writ petitions, permitting farmers to sow summer paddy in their fields based on their choice, regardless of waterlogging status. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case