Latest Uttarakhand Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
The Division Bench held that because the District Assistant Registrar exercised statutory powers under the Uttarakhand Co-operative Societies Act to direct termination, the writ petition was maintainable and wrongly dismissed.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a revision against a trial court's refusal to compel an indigent plaintiff to deposit court fee mid-trial, holding the defendants had skipped the mandatory first step.
The Uttarakhand High Court partly allowed a Section 482 CrPC petition, holding that summoning under Section 354A IPC and Sections 11/12 POCSO was unsustainable where the complainant's own recorded statements lacked the required ingredients.
The Uttarakhand High Court set aside an award against the Power Corporation, holding that liability under the Employees Compensation Act can only be fastened on the actual employer of the deceased.
Health Workers appointed after 2013 cannot claim Grade Pay of Rs. 2800 given to pre-2013 colleagues under a court judgment, the Uttarakhand High Court has held.
Uttarakhand High Court dismisses quashing petitions filed by an absconding accused and his daughters in a cheating case involving Patanjali Ayurveda and Divya Pharmacy, holding the power of attorney route impermissible.
Three candidates cleared in a forensic OMR inquiry still lost their appointment claim after the High Court held that exoneration from malpractice creates no vested right to selection.
A general notice by Northern Railways asking occupants at Jharipani, Mussoorie to vacate within 30 days was quashed for lacking any statutory basis and violating due process.
The Uttarakhand High Court held that an injured claimant who pleaded guilty to rash driving in a criminal case cannot claim compensation before the MACT, as the plea amounts to an admission of sole fault.
The High Court of Uttarakhand found that the food analyst's report gave no reason why "Maha Value" on a snack packet was false or misleading, and quashed penalties imposed on PepsiCo India.
The High Court of Uttarakhand found the arbitral tribunal's circle-rate-based compensation lawful under Section 26 of the 2013 Act, while holding that findings on two other issues were not in accordance with law.
The Uttarakhand High Court quashed a 2018 District Magistrate order cancelling a fair price shop licence after the State admitted the order bore no signature of the District Magistrate.
The Uttarakhand High Court quashed the cancellation of a fair price shop dealer's agreement, holding that a forgery finding based solely on the Panchayat Secretary's denial, without any handwriting expert opinion, is unsustainable.
Uttarakhand High Court holds that without a Departmental Promotion Committee assessment in 2021, AIIMS Rishikesh nursing officers cannot claim Senior Nursing Officer promotion from that year.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a writ petition by an outsourced Forest Department worker whose engagement was ended after he visited an accused in an illicit tree-felling case and disclosed sensitive official information.
The Uttarakhand High Court set aside a Sessions Judge's order directing FIR registration against a Circle Officer and SHO under Section 4 of the SC/ST Act, ruling that an administrative inquiry recommendation is mandatory before any such direction.
Uttarakhand High Court grants bail to two NDPS accused after finding that inventory and arrest memo bore the FIR number before the FIR was registered, casting doubt on recovery proceedings.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a writ petition by two outsourced stenographers who challenged the reversal of their designation from Senior Personal Assistant back to Stenographer.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed six writ petitions challenging candidature rejections in a statistical officer recruitment, holding that qualification equivalence cannot be determined by courts or assumed by selecting bodies absent an express rule.
The Uttarakhand High Court quashed FIR No. 18 of 2025 registered at P.S. Mussoorie, finding the dispute over Modi Bhawan essentially civil in nature with both parties already pursuing separate suits.
The High Court quashed two Haridwar FIRs as impermissible successive FIRs but refused to quash two others, finding prima facie cognisable offences in social media posts targeting a political figure.
The High Court of Uttarakhand held that repossessing a commercial vehicle through recovery agents, without notice or due process, violates Article 300A and is unsustainable in law.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed Zabir's appeal against conviction under Section 5/6 of POCSO, finding the child victim's testimony credible despite minor inconsistencies in post-incident details.
