PANNALAL . vs STATE OF U.P.. — SLP(C) No. 10084/2011

Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010102152011

Filing Date

30-Mar-2011

Registration No

SLP(C) No. 10084/2011

Diary Number

10215/2011

Order Date

18-Apr-2013

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Last updated 18-Mar-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PANNALAL .

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P..

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 27-Feb-2013
  4. 29-Oct-2012
  5. 02-Jul-2012
  6. 16-Apr-2012
  7. 09-Apr-2012
  8. 08-Nov-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 30-Sep-2011
  10. 15-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 16-Aug-2011
  12. 01-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 25-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 19-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 05-Jul-2011
  16. 12-May-2011
  17. 10-May-2011
  18. 09-May-2011
  19. 06-May-2011
  20. 05-May-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 02-May-2011
  22. 29-Apr-2011
  23. 29-Apr-2011
  24. 21-Apr-2011
  25. 18-Apr-2011
  26. 04-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  27. 01-Apr-2011
  28. 01-Apr-2011
  29. 30-Mar-2011

    Case filed

    Registration No. SLP(C) No. 10084/2011

  30. 14-Mar-2011
  31. 07-Mar-2011
  32. 03-Feb-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  33. 21-Jan-2011
  34. 13-Dec-2010
  35. 19-Nov-2010
  36. 01-Oct-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of SLP(C) No. 10084/2011 (Pannalal v. State of U.P.) On 18/04/2013, the Supreme Court heard all Special Leave Petitions filed by Pannalal and multiple co-petitioners against the State of U.P., which challenged a Allahabad High Court order regarding Rule 26 of the Uttar Pradesh (Civil Police) Constables and Head Constables Service Rules, 2008. The petitioners' counsel submitted that nothing material remained for the Court's consideration, rendering the petitions infructuous. The respondent State did not oppose this position. Consequently, the Court disposed of all petitions as infructuous but granted the petitioners liberty to challenge Rule 26's constitutional validity through an appropriate petition to the proper forum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case