A writ petition withdrawn by leave of the Court is dismissed as withdrawn without adjudication on merits. Such a disposal does not affirm, overrule, or modify existing legal principles and does not serve as a binding precedent. The judgment clarifies the procedural status of withdrawn writ petitions for litigants and counsel in administrative law matters.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPMS/1028/2025 of M/S ROCKLAND HOTELS RUDRAPUR PVT LTD Vs DEPUTY MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER |
| CNR | UKHC010046712025 |
| Date of Registration | 04-04-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Precedent Value | Not a precedent on merits; not binding authority |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Not binding; dismissal as withdrawn does not create precedent |
| Persuasive For | Not persuasive for other High Courts or the Supreme Court on points of law |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- No new legal principle has been enunciated, clarified, or overruled in the present judgment.
- The Court’s order simply records allowance of the petitioner’s application for withdrawal.
- Lawyers should note that voluntary withdrawal does not result in an adjudication on merits or establish precedent.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court received an application for withdrawal from the petitioner.
- After considering the reasons for withdrawal as stated in the application, the Court permitted the withdrawal.
- The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
- No discussion took place regarding questions of law, statutes, or merits of the dispute.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Filed an application seeking withdrawal of the writ petition.
Respondent(s)
- No arguments by the respondents on merits are recorded with respect to withdrawal.
Factual Background
- The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Uttarakhand.
- An application (IA No. 2 of 2025) was moved on behalf of the petitioner seeking withdrawal of the petition.
- The Court allowed the application, resulting in dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn.
- No facts of the substantive dispute are recorded in the order.
Statutory Analysis
- No statutory provision has been analyzed or interpreted in the judgment.
- The order concerns the procedural aspect of withdrawal of writ petitions.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
The judgment is authored solely by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari; no concurring or dissenting opinions are recorded.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural innovation or guideline is established by the Court in this order.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ No new precedent created or followed; order is procedural and not substantive.