TAJAMMUL KHAN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — WPMS/710/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010044712026

Filing Number

WPMS/2374/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

WPMS/710/2026

Registration Date

23-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

07-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.TAJAMMUL KHAN

    Adv. SHIVANGI GANGWAR

  2. 2.CHAND MIYAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

  2. 2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

    Adv. C.S.C.

  3. 3.SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE KICHHA

    Adv. C.S.C.

  4. 4.CHIEF AGRICULTURAL OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

  5. 5.DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER

    Adv. C.S.C.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

    The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the District Magistrate's order dated 04.02.2026 that restricted petitioners from sowing summer paddy except in waterlogged fields. Following its earlier judgment in a similar case (WPMS No.612 of 2026), the court permitted the petitioners to sow summer paddy in their fields of their own choice, irrespective of waterlogging conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMS/710/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the District Magistrate's order dated 04.02.2026 that restricted petitioners from sowing summer paddy except in waterlogged fields. Following its earlier judgment in a similar case (WPMS No.612 of 2026), the court permitted the petitioners to sow summer paddy in their fields of their own choice, irrespective of waterlogging conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case