Punjab & Haryana HC Halts Admission of Paid Senior Citizens to Chandigarh Group Home, Orders Three-Month Awareness Drive for Mental Illness Patients

The Division Bench directed U.T. Chandigarh to run a three-month awareness campaign and keep a two-month window open for mental illness patients before admitting paid senior citizens to Group Home, Sector 31-C.

A Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, passed an interim order on 27 May 2026 in a PIL concerning the Group Home at Sector 31-C, Chandigarh — a facility meant for patients of mental illness. The court stayed the admission of paid senior citizens to the facility after the U.T. Administration decided to share the premises with them, citing low occupancy by mental illness patients. The bench found that the low occupancy was itself a product of inadequate publicity and a narrow application window, and directed that a widely publicised awareness campaign run for three months, followed by a two-month application window for mental illness patients, before any further admissions of senior citizens are processed.

The Administrator's Decision and the Petitioner's Challenge

On 28 April 2026, the Administrator of U.T. Chandigarh decided that Group Home, Sector 31-C, Chandigarh would be shared with paid senior citizens. The stated reason was low occupancy by patients of mental illness.

Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Kshitij Sharma, contested this reasoning before the bench. He pointed out that until November 2025, the security deposit for admission to the Group Home was as high as ₹20 lakhs — a sum that would have placed the facility out of reach for many prospective residents. The deposit was subsequently reduced to between ₹3 lakhs and ₹6 lakhs, but the reduction was not accompanied by any meaningful publicity campaign.

Counsel further submitted that after the reduction, the U.T. Administration offered only two application windows: one of four weeks and another of six weeks. The bench was told that these windows were opened without adequate awareness being spread among potential applicants. The petitioner's position was that the low occupancy figures, which the Administration relied upon to justify sharing the facility with senior citizens, did not reflect genuine lack of demand but rather a failure to inform eligible patients that the facility existed and was now more accessible.

The Court's Reasoning on Occupancy and Awareness

The bench accepted the petitioner's submission in substance. It recorded that the possibility of a larger number of mental illness patients coming forward, if an awareness campaign were spread in a proper manner, could not be ruled out. This finding was central to the interim relief granted.

The court did not treat the Administrator's decision as inherently impermissible, but it declined to allow the sharing arrangement to proceed before the facility's intended beneficiaries had a genuine opportunity to apply. The logic was straightforward: a conclusion of low demand drawn from a process that lacked adequate publicity could not justify repurposing the facility, even partially, without first testing demand under proper conditions.

The bench was also informed that the Executive Committee of the UTTHAAN society — the body governing the Group Home under Article 13 of its Memorandum — had last met in November 2025. No meetings had taken place since. The court treated this as a separate governance failure requiring a specific direction.

Interim Directions Issued

By way of interim order, the bench issued the following directions:

A widely publicised awareness campaign shall be conducted for the next three months. After the campaign concludes, a window of at least two months shall be kept open for mental illness patients to apply for admission to the Group Home.

Until the campaign and the application window are completed, the admission of paid senior citizens to the facility shall remain postponed. The court was careful to carve out an exception: the interim order does not affect paid senior citizens who have already been admitted to the Group Home.

Applications from senior citizens that are pending may continue to be received, but they shall not be processed until the next date of hearing.

The U.T. Administration was also directed to ensure the availability of adequate professional and Class-IV staff at the facility.

On the governance issue, the bench directed that the Executive Committee of the UTTHAAN society convene within one week of the order. The U.T. Administration was directed to ensure that the Committee meets in accordance with the prescribed policy under Article 13 of the Memorandum.

A compliance report covering all the above directions is to be filed before the next date of hearing.

Miscellaneous Applications Disposed

Before passing the interim order, the bench disposed of two miscellaneous applications. CM-23-CWPIL-2026 was allowed, and the Standard Operating Procedures for Group Home, Sector 31, Chandigarh were taken on record as Annexures R-3/5 and R-3/6, subject to all just exceptions. CM-63-CWPIL-2026 was also allowed, and an additional affidavit along with Annexures P-67 to P-73 was taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

CM-293-CWPIL-2026 was the application on which the substantive interim directions were passed, after hearing learned counsel for the rival parties.

Mr. Aditya Vikram Rametra appeared as applicant-in-person in CM-298-CWPIL-2026. Ms. Gurpreet Bhatti, Advocate, appeared for the petitioner in CWP-PIL-211-2024. Ms. Shubreet Kaur, Additional Standing Counsel, and Ms. Sukriti Gupta, Junior Panel Counsel, appeared for U.T. Chandigarh.

Order

The matter is listed for further hearing on 23 July 2026. A photocopy of the order has been directed to be placed on the file of the connected case, CWP-10284-2025.