GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs THE PERMANENT LOKADALAT SAS NAGAR MOHALI AND ANOTHER — CWP/14490/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226-227. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 11-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010781152026

e-Filing Number

06-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/28271/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/14490/2026

Registration Date

07-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Coram

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Category

63.32 - CASES RELATING TO PUS REG PLOT/DWEL UNIT DIS OF PB ( 748 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

11-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226-227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

    Adv. BHANU PRATAP SINGH

  2. 2.The Permanent LokAdalat SAS Nagar Mohali and Another

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE PERMANENT LOKADALAT SAS NAGAR MOHALI AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.The Permanent LokAdalat SAS Nagar Mohali and Another

  3. 3.Dhumma Ram

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Jagmohan BansalView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP/14490/2026 Court Decision (11.05.2026): The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed GMADA's petition challenging the Lok Adalat's order. The court upheld the Lok Adalat's decision requiring GMADA to refund ₹3,76,000 deposited by Dhumma Ram, plus ₹25,000 compensation and ₹20,000 legal costs with 8% interest, finding no manifest legal infirmity warranting interference. Key Reasoning: Although Ram failed to provide required documents (Punjab residency proof) for the reserved category plot and his application was rejected, the court held that the scheme brochure contained no clause empowering GMADA to forfeit the application fee. The clause permitting rejection only addressed allocation consequences, not fee forfeiture rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14490/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP/14490/2026 Court Decision (11.05.2026): The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed GMADA's petition challenging the Lok Adalat's order. The court upheld the Lok Adalat's decision requiring GMADA to refund ₹3,76,000 deposited by Dhumma Ram, plus ₹25,000 compensation and ₹20,000 legal costs with 8% interest, finding no manifest legal infirmity warranting interference. Key Reasoning: Although Ram failed to provide required documents (Punjab residency proof) for the reserved category plot and his application was rejected, the court held that the scheme brochure contained no clause empowering GMADA to forfeit the application fee. The clause permitting rejection only addressed allocation consequences, not fee forfeiture rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case