Allowed

Ranjit Singh Gope etc. v. Greater Mohali Area Development Authority&Ors

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Feb 2011CWP/18347/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a direction not to construct further on a GMADAllotted plot. The court held that despite a status-quo order in a related acquisition case, the petitioners, having already raised construction based on prior valid allotments, should be allowed to complete furnishing work subject to the final orders in the connection matter.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted liberty to complete furnishing work and pending construction, subject to orders in the connected matter of CWP No. 7156 of 2001.

Ranjit Singh Gope etc. Vs Greater Mohali Area… — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

C.W.P. No. 18347 of 2010 . [O&M] Date of Decision: 10^th February, 2011 .

¶3

Ranjit Singh Gope & Anr. Petitioners through Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate

¶4

Versus

¶5

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority & Anr. Respondents through Mr. H.S.Brar, Advocate.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶8

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶9

SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL]

¶10

This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 18347, 18488 and 20552 of 2010 as common issues are involved in these cases. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 18347 of 2010.

¶11

The petitioners are father and son respectively who seek quashing of Memo dated 14.07.2009 [Annexure P-12] followed by letter dated 02.02.2010 [Annexure P-14] issued by the respondents -GMADA authorities whereby they have been directed not to raise further construction on Plot No. 1279, Sector 80, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

¶12

The above-said plot has been allotted to the petitioners by the GMADA in a draw of lots vide Letter of Intent dated 30.03.2001 [Annexure P-2] followed by Allotment Letter dated 27.12.2007 [Annexure P-3]. The possession of the plot was delivered to them on 25.03.2008 and it appears that all the dues towards allotment price

¶13

have already been paid by them. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted building the plans which were duly sanctioned by the GMADA vide letter dated 12.09.2008 [Annexure P-6] followed by demarcation and delivery of the physical possession of the plot vide report dated 06.10.2008 [Annexure P-7]. The petitioners have raised the construction strictly as per the sanctioned building plans and it appears from the photographs on record that a double storeyed house has been constructed by them which is near completion. Meanwhile, the impugned communication has been issued directing the petitioners not to raise further construction on the ground that this Court in CWP No. 7156 of 2001 [Pal Singh & Ors. V State of Punjab & Ors.] , has directed the parties to maintain status-quo.

¶14

As per the averments made by the petitioners, the aforestated writ petition has been filed by the landowners challenging acquisition of their land in which this Court vide order dated 17.05.2001 directed the parties to maintain “status-quo regarding possession”.

¶15

The case of the petitioners is that the allotment of the subject plot had already been made in their favour through the draw of lots before the status-quo was directed to be maintained.

¶16

Be that as it may, the afore-stated order was admittedly not conveyed to the petitioners nor was it given effect while delivering physical possession of the plot or while sanctioning the building plans. At this stage when the petitioners have already raised substantial construction, the clock can not be reversed by directing them not to raise any construction. The photographs placed on record reveal that if the petitioners are not allowed to complete the

¶17

furnishing work, their hard-earned money of lacs of rupees would go waste which would serve no body's purpose.

¶18

Consequently, the writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to complete the furnishing work/pending construction work, subject, however, to the orders that may be passed by this Court in CWP No. 7156 of 2001 and/or other connected matters wherein acquisition proceedings are under challenge.

¶19

Disposed of. Dasti .

¶20

February 10, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE

Ranjit Singh Gope etc. v. Greater Mohali Area Development Authority&Ors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh Gope etc. v. Greater Mohali Area Development Authority&Ors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdip Lal Chopra Vs A.G. Punjab and Ors.

Arjinder Singh etc. Vs Pb. St. Electy. Board etc.

Manjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Manmohan Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Hari Mohan Dixit and Ors. Vs Punjab and Haryana High Court Chd. and Anr.

Avtar Singh Vs Icici Bank Ltd.