TRIPTA DEVI vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — CWP/32425/2025
Case under Constitution of India Section 226 227. Disposed: --ALLOWED on 12th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC011758942025
e-Filing Number
30-10-2025
Filing Number
CWP/68454/2025
Filing Date
30-Oct-2025
Registration No
CWP/32425/2025
Registration Date
30-Oct-2025
Judge
Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi , Mr. Justice Deepak Manchanda
Coram
Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi , Mr. Justice Deepak Manchanda
Bench Type
Double
Category
4.8 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ( 364 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
12-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
--ALLOWED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.TRIPTA DEVI
Adv. SURESH PAL
-
2.Union of India and others
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
-
2.Union of India and others
-
3.The C G O Admin
-
4.The Executive Engineer Chandigarh I
-
5.The Assistant Estate Manager
-
6.Sh Kavinder Pal Singh
-
7.Central Administrative Tribunal
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-May-2026
Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi,mr. Justice Deepak ManchandaView PDF
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petition of Tripta Devi, a 45% disabled unmarried woman employed with the Indian Air Force, setting aside the cancellation of her government accommodation allotment and Rs. 3,96,410 penal rent imposed in November 2022. The court found that her widowed sister and niece residing with her did not constitute subletting but rather necessary family support for her disability, holding no violation of the 2017 Rules occurred. The court awarded Rs. 50,000 compensation for harassment and four years of litigation expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/32425/2025
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petition of Tripta Devi, a 45% disabled unmarried woman employed with the Indian Air Force, setting aside the cancellation of her government accommodation allotment and Rs. 3,96,410 penal rent imposed in November 2022. The court found that her widowed sister and niece residing with her did not constitute subletting but rather necessary family support for her disability, holding no violation of the 2017 Rules occurred. The court awarded Rs. 50,000 compensation for harassment and four years of litigation expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts