The High Court of Uttarakhand confirms that writ petitions can be dismissed as infructuous when the petitioner’s counsel concedes the matter has been overtaken by events, affirming established procedural law without altering substantive legal principles. Such dismissals do not create binding legal precedent for substantive issues but clarify procedural practice for future cases.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPMS/2497/2023 of JAIWATI DEVI Vs EXCISE COMMISSIONER STATE OF UTTARAKHAND |
| CNR | UKHC010144162023 |
| Date of Registration | 05-09-2023 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI |
| Court | High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Bench | Single Bench |
| Precedent Value | Limited to procedural context; does not adjudicate merits |
| Type of Law | Procedural Law (Writ Petitions) |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All procedural matters in the High Court of Uttarakhand where petitions have become infructuous. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering procedural dismissals based on counsel’s concession. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that a writ petition will be dismissed as infructuous where the counsel for petitioners formally submits that it is no longer necessary due to lapse of time.
- Confirms that such procedural dismissals do not establish precedent on any substantive legal points raised in the petition.
- Lawyers should be precise in making such concessions, as they result in disposal without adjudication on merits.
- Ensures judicial time is not spent on cases that have become academic due to changed circumstances.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The learned counsel for the petitioners made a clear statement at the bar that the writ petitions had become infructuous by efflux of time.
- The court, relying upon this unequivocal submission, held that nothing survived for adjudication and, accordingly, dismissed the writ petitions as infructuous.
- No discussion or determination was made regarding the merits or substantive legal questions in the petition.
- The order is strictly procedural, flowing from the standard judicial practice of not adjudicating infructuous or academic issues.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Through counsel, expressly stated that the writ petitions have become infructuous due to efflux of time.
Respondent (State)
- No specific arguments recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
The writ petitions were filed before the High Court of Uttarakhand and were pending as of the hearing. On the date of the order, counsel for the petitioners stated that these petitions had become infructuous by the efflux of time. Based on this submission, the court dismissed the petitions as infructuous without entering into the merits of the dispute.
Statutory Analysis
No discussion or interpretation of statutory provisions was undertaken, as the disposal was based solely on procedural grounds arising from the concession made by the petitioners’ counsel.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded. The dismissal order was passed by a single judge.
Procedural Innovations
- Confirms the established practice that counsel’s admission as to the infructuousness of a writ petition is sufficient for dismissal without further inquiry.
- No new procedural requirements or innovations are specified.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Procedural precedent on disposing of infructuous matters reaffirmed.