( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Peoples Union for Civil liberties (for short P. U. C. L.) praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the central Bureau of Investigation to investigate the incident which occurred on May 18, 2000 in which women were subjected to inhuman treatment and lathi charge by the police at Dehradun and for commanding the State of U. P. to hold disciplinary enquiry against the erring officers and to punish them in accordance with law and also for a direction to respondents to pay compensation to the victims of police atrocities.

( 2 ) THE petitioner (P. U. C. L.) claims that it is an organisation which is dedicated to upholding of human right, civil liberties and democratic rights. According to the petitioner, an organisation known as Uttarakhand Mahila Manch (hereinafter referred to as Mahila Manch) used to stage regular dharnas in the Court campus of Dehradun in connection with their demand of separate uttarakhand State. On May 18, 2000, some women activists of the Mahila Manch took out a silent procession as the Parliament had failed to pass the bill for creation of a separate State. When the procession reached near the gate of civil court, a large contingent of police force blocked their way and did not allow them to proceed further inspite of request made by the women activists. According to the petitioner, some women activists forcibly entered the Court compound but the policemen started beating them and they also resorted to lathi charge in which several members of the Mahila Manch received injuries. The petitioner thus prays that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate and hold enquiry regarding the alleged incident and police atrocities on the member of Mahila Manch, initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the erring officers and also prays that respondents may be directed to pay compensation to the members of the Mahila Manch who received injuries in the incident.

( 3 ) THE record shows that the writ petition was filed in the office of Registrar (Listing) on October 24, 2000 and came up for hearing before the Admission Bench presided by Honble the Chief justice on November 13, 2000. Subsequently, by an order of nomination of Honble the Chief justice dated November 16, 2000 it was placed for admission before this Bench. The incident which has given rise to the present petition took place in Dehradun which after the appointed day is no longer within the State of Uttar Pradesh and falls within the territory of State of uttaranchal. The first question which requires consideration is whether the Allahabad High court has the jurisdiction to entertain and hear this petition.

( 4 ) THE Parliament enacted the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 (Act No. 29 of 2000) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to provide for reorganisation of the existing State of Uttar pradesh and for matters connected therewith. The Act came into force on August 25, 2000 and the "appointed day" as defined under Section 2 (a) of the Act, by virtue of notification issued by the Central Government in Official Gazette, is November 9, 2000. In view of Section 3 of the act, a separate State of Uttaranchal was formed from the "appointed day" which comprises the territories of certain districts of the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh including that of district dehradun. After the notification was issued, Dehradun ceased to be part of the existing State of uttar Pradesh. Part IV of the Act deals with High Court and Sections 26, 32, 33, 35, 37 and 38 of the Act which are relevant for the controversy in hand are reproduced below :

"26. High Court of Uttaranchal.-- (1) As from the appointed day, there shall be a separate High court for the State of Uttaranchal (hereinafter referred to as the "the High Court of Uttaranchal")and the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad shall become the High Court for the State o