Suresh Kumar Jindal v. State Of Punjab And Another

CWP-6660-2026 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-6660-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 06.03.2026 SURESH KUMAR JINDAL ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

...Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present:

Mr. Harish Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Avin Sandhu, Advocate for respondent No.2-GMADA. Mr. Aftab Singh Khara, Senior DAG, Punjab.

**** Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have illegally demanded Preferred Location Charges (PLC) which were paid by the petitioner under protest. He also submits that similar petitions including CWP9717-2019 titled as 'Daulat Ram Bhatti Vs. State of Punjab and others,' and other connected matters have been allowed on 20.02.2025 whereby the demand raised of additional PLC was quashed and further directions were issued to GMADA for refund of the amount paid towards PLC by the petitioners therein. 2.

Issue notice to the respondents.

3.

Mr. Aftab Singh Khara, Senior DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.1.

4.

Ms. Avin Sandhu, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.2-GMADA. She does not dispute that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment in the case of Daulat Ram Bhatti (supra). KUMARI SAPNA 2026.03.06 15.52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-6660-2026 (O&M)  5.

Heard.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of in the same terms as the judgment in the case of Daulat Ram Bhatti (supra). 7.

All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) 06.03.2025 JUDGE Sapna Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No KUMARI SAPNA 2026.03.06 15.52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document