IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 118 CWP-8832-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 14.07.2026 MEENAKSHI SYAN ....Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present: Mr. Vatanjeet Bajwan, Advocate, Mr. Manish Dhiman, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shruti, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Ms. Avin Sandhu, Advocate for respondent-GMADA. * * * * JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral) CM-9444-CWP-2026 The present application had been filed seeking preponement of the date of hearing of the main petition. Since the main petition is already listed on Board for hearing, the present application stands disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. CM-9445-CWP-2026 For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed. Annexures P-10 and P-11 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. CWP-8832-2026 1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing SANDAL SHARMA 2026.07.17 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-8832-2026 (O&M) -2- the respondents No.2 and 4 to remove the illegal construction raised by respondents No.5 and 6 in front of the property of the petitioner being in contravention of the layout plan dated 05.06.2015 (Annexure P-3). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is having a house in TDI City, Sector 110, SAS Nagar (Mohali) and that an illegal construction has been raised by the developer in front of the said house in violation of the sanctioned plan submitted by the developer. He submitted that the construction raised by the respondent- developer is unauthorized and has directly affected the rights of the petitioner. He further submitted that a complaint was made to respondent- GMADA, but no action has been taken by the respondents and that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent-GMADA to consider the complaint/representation dated 23.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) submitted by the petitioner and her husband, after associating them during the proceedings. He has further prayed that a time-bound direction be issued. 3. At this stage, Ms. Avin Sandhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-GMADA, has submitted that GMADA has no objection if the complaint/representation dated 23.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) submitted by the petitioner to the Deputy Commissioner, SAS Nagar (Mohali), copy of which has been forwarded to GMADA, is considered in accordance with law after associating the petitioner and her husband. She further submitted that if any violation is found, appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with law. 4. After hearing learned counsels for the parties, we deem it appropriate to issue direction to the competent authorities of GMADA to SANDAL SHARMA 2026.07.17 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-8832-2026 (O&M) -3- consider the complaint/representation dated 23.12.2025 (Annexure P-9) addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, SAS Nagar (Mohali), a copy whereof has been forwarded to respondent-GMADA, in accordance with law, after associating the petitioner and her husband at the time of considering the complaint on the spot. In the event any violation is found, necessary action shall be taken in accordance with law. 5. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from today. 6. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) JUDGE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 14.07.2026 S.Sharma i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No SANDAL SHARMA 2026.07.17 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment