'Can't Be Left Remediless': P&H High Court Orders Temporary Power Supply To 500+ Families In Abandoned Housing Project

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued interim directions to provide temporary electricity connections to residents of Sushma Valencia Apartments, an allegedly abandoned housing project in Zirakpur, while calling upon authorities to evolve a comprehensive solution to the crisis.

Justice Sanjay Vashisth said, "The citizen of this country are residing in a welfare state and they cannot be left in lurch due to failure of the system/administration. In the scorching heat, which is being experienced in this part of the country now-a- days, a large number of human beings which also includes small children, old aged persons and females, cannot be left remediless and compelled to first fulfil all the rigmaroles of the technicalities to get regular electricity supply. Moreover, such people have invested their hard earned money with the hope to live in a shelter according to their stature."

The Court was hearing a plea filed by the Sushma Valencia Apartment Owners Association, representing over 500 families residing in the project. The petition seeks directions to the State authorities and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) to provide electricity connections after the developer, Suksha Developers Private Limited, allegedly abandoned the project and absconded.

Previously, on May 19, 2026, a Coordinate Bench had directed PSPCL to consider requests of individual residents willing to deposit requisite charges, noting that the project had been abandoned and that similar relief had been granted in other cases.

In the present application, the petitioner-association sought immediate compliance with the earlier order. During the hearing, PSPCL submitted that electricity connections could be released if residents collectively deposit Rs. 4.44 crore, excluding an additional penalty liability of Rs. 43.55 lakh.

Opposing the demand, counsel for the petitioner argued that the financial liability lies with the absconding builder and not the residents. It was further submitted that out of 900 flats, 700 units have been constructed and around 125 are already receiving electricity supply, and that even if each resident contributes normal charges, the amount demanded by PSPCL cannot be met.

Taking note of the hardship faced by residents, particularly in extreme summer conditions, the Court observed that citizens cannot be left remediless due to administrative failures. It emphasized that people who have invested their life savings in such housing projects should not suffer due to the default of developers.

The Court also underscored the responsibility of the State to have regulatory mechanisms in place to address such contingencies at the stage of granting licenses to builders.

Justice Vashisth observed that the builders first of all allure people by showing lucrative projects and make them ready to invest their hard earned money in such projects. After collecting crores of rupees from such people and pocketing it, the net result comes out that on a fine day the responsible persons of the developer/builder absconds making the investors to suffer without any fault on their part.

"In fact, it was bounden duty of the State machinery to develop a mechanism/rules/regulations beforehand, while issuing license/permissions to the builders that in a given situation as is accruing in the present case, how the respite would be provided to the consumers, to whom actually the services/ shelters were to be provided by the State machinery through such builders, who is/are at run as on date," it added.

Accordingly, the Court directed the Superintending Engineer or any other senior responsible officer of the respondent-PSPCL to convene a meeting with the concerned State authorities including GMADA to sort out the issue and thereupon apprise this Court the decision/ solution taken in this regard, especially keeping in view the difficulties faced by the members of the petitioner-association. The representatives of the petitioner-association can also be called to attend such meeting.

While listing the matter for June 19, the Court said, "Meanwhile, on payment of usual charges + Rs.20,000/- by each of the resident/consumer, temporary electricity connection would be provided by the respondent-PSPCL, till further orders."

The Court clarified that, upon release of such temporary electricity connections, the consumers would be liable to pay further charges as may be leviable as per actual electricity consumption and that this would be a purely stop gap arrangement and would not give a right to the members of the petitioner-association for regularization of such temporary electricity connections into permanent one.

Mr. Gurminder Singh Dhot, Advocate for applicant/petitioner.

Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

Ms. Priyanka Malik, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Pradeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.4-GMADA.

Title: SUSHMA VALENCIA APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Click here to read order