M/S GSB BUILDERS v. GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GLADA)
CWP/25715/2025 · 2025-09-01
Anupinder Singh Grewal, Deepak Manchanda
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 96809 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 96809 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 128
M/S GSB BUILDERS
GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTH
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE
Present: Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
The (Annexure P-5) issued to the petitioner
2.
Learned counsel for the promoter of the issued a ‘No Due been cancelled by the impugned order residential units have been sold was handed over to the Residents Welfare Association for maintenance. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be fastened liability. By the impugned order, the and it has been directed petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition bearing CWP No. challenging the order passed by the off on 01.05.2025 (Annexure P a fresh one with better particulars. representation to respondent grievances and submits that the petition be respondent to consider and decide the accordance with law IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-25715-2025
DATE OF DECISION:
M/S GSB BUILDERS
Versus GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, Advocate ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.02.2025 whereby the respondent had directed petitioner to develop a residential colony.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the f the residential project. He had paid the entire dues and had been No Dues Certificate’ on 08.10.2013 (Annexure P en cancelled by the impugned order dated 19.02.2025 residential units have been sold by the petitioner handed over to the Residents Welfare Association for Therefore, the petitioner cannot be fastened By the impugned order, the licence of the and it has been directed that an FIR be registered against the had earlier preferred a writ petition bearing CWP No. challenging the order passed by the respondent. The writ f on 01.05.2025 (Annexure P-7) and liberty was granted fresh one with better particulars. He also submits that the representation to respondent on 05.05.2025 (Annexure P and submits that the petition be disposed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 DATE OF DECISION: 01.09.2025
… Petitioner (s) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
... Respondent(s) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL PARMOD GOYAL dvocate for the petitioner.
has challenged the order dated 19.02.2025 had directed cancellation of licence colony. submits that the petitioner is the residential project. He had paid the entire dues and had been (Annexure P-2). His licence had dated 19.02.2025 (Annexure P-5). All the petitioner and in 2014 even the project handed over to the Residents Welfare Association for day-to-day Therefore, the petitioner cannot be fastened with any criminal of the project has been cancelled FIR be registered against the petitioner. The had earlier preferred a writ petition bearing CWP No.12056 of 2025, respondent. The writ petition was disposed was granted to the petitioner to file also submits that the petitioner has sent a Annexure P-8) with regard to his
disposed of with a direction to same in a time bound manner in
has challenged the order dated 19.02.2025 licence is the residential project. He had paid the entire dues and had been . His licence had he the project day criminal project has been cancelled The , posed to file a with regard to his of with a direction to n SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.09.01 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-25715-2025
-2-
3.
Issue notice to the respondent.
4.
At the asking of the Court, Mr. Ratik Chatrath Kapur, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent.
5.
Heard.
6.
The petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure P-8) within a period of one month from now, in accordance with law.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE
(PARMOD GOYAL)
JUDGE 01.09.2025 SwarnjitS
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable
: Yes / No
SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.09.01 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document