Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000

10 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

SUMAN DEVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

2021 INSC 21225 March 2021Dismissed

The Uttarakhand Government advertised 440 ANM vacancies in 2016 without specifying the statutory requirement of an intermediate qualification in the science stream, which the appellants challenged as contrary to the 1997 Service Rules (amended 1998) that continued to apply after the state's creation. The Supreme Court

GULJAR SINGH & ORS.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

2009 INSC 50515 April 2009Dismissed

The dispute concerned 564 bighas of land that had been jointly purchased and later divided among several tenure holders, whose names were not correctly entered in revenue records. The appellants sought correction of the records, leading to a series of applications before the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Assistant Recording

UTTAR PRADESH JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED & ORS.versusBALBIR SINGH

2021 INSC 47313 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Labour Court, Dehradun awarded reinstatement and back wages to Balbir Singh, which the appellants challenged by filing Writ Petition No.6898 of 1997 before the Allahabad High Court. After the creation of Uttarakhand, Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 required such proceedings to be transfe

DOIWALA SEHKARI SHRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 99612 December 2006Disposed off

Doiwala Sehkari Shram Samvida Samiti Ltd., a private mining firm, applied for a ten‑year lease for minor minerals under Rule 9‑A of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. After the bifurcation of Uttar Pradesh, the new State of Uttarakhand adopted the rules with modifications and introduced a policy that, as

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL THRU. SECRETARYversusSEHNAZ MIRZA & ORS.

2008 INSC 63812 May 2008Case Partly allowed

Employees of a college filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking regularisation of their services, which was partially granted. The order was not complied with, leading the employees to file a contempt petition under Sections 12 and 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. After the Uttar Pradesh Reorgan

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ORS.versusSIDHARTH SRIVASTAVA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 2995 June 2003Appeal(s) allowed

After the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 created the new State of Uttaranchal, the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (UPPSC) had already selected candidates for 544 J.E. Civil/Technical posts and sent its recommendations to the Uttar Pradesh Government, which forwarded them to Uttaranchal. The Uttaranchal

PRADEEP CHAUDHARY & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2009 INSC 6745 May 2009Dismissed

The petitioners, residents of Haridwar district, challenged the inclusion of their district in the newly created State of Uttarakhand under the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000, alleging that the Parliament violated the mandatory consultation provision in the proviso to Article 3 of the Constitution. They argued

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusRAJKUMAR SHARMA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1353 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission advertised 544 Junior Engineer posts for the Hill Cadre of the undivided state and published a select list in 2000. After the creation of the new State of Uttaranchal, the Uttar Pradesh Government forwarded the list to Uttaranchal, which refused to appoint the candidates, cit

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search