Writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous after petitioners reported subsequent developments.

The petitioners in two connected writ petitions under Article 226 challenged orders issued by Joint Directors of Agriculture concerning their respective arrangements with the department.

While the petitions were pending, the petitioners filed a memo stating that, in view of subsequent developments, the relief sought no longer survived and the petitions had become infructuous.

1. Whether the writ petitions should be disposed of as infructuous in light of the petitioners’ memo.

2. Whether any determination on the validity of the challenged orders was required.

The petitions were brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Court applied the procedural principle that a writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous where the relief sought no longer survives for consideration; no substantive statutory provision or precedent was cited or applied in the order.

The petitioners expressly represented that subsequent developments had rendered the requested relief unnecessary and sought disposal of the petitions as infructuous.

The Court placed the memo on record and, accepting that position, did not examine the merits or legality of the challenged orders.

It made no ruling on the merits of the challenged orders.