Karnail Singh v. State of Punjab (PMAY, 2024) - verification note

Until July 2026, this page summarised a ruling with these specifics:

• Case: Karnail Singh v. State of Punjab, Punjab and Haryana High Court
• Number and date: CWP/2024/006789, decided 3 April 2024
• Holding: PMAY-G subsidy instalments delayed beyond 18 months attract 9% per annum simple interest; “Citizen Charter timelines are enforceable obligations”
• Provision applied: “Section PMAY-G” of the RTI Act, 2005

We re-checked each element against primary sources on 10 July 2026:

1. No such case on Indian Kanoon. Searches for “Karnail Singh” with “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana” / “Awas Yojana” across the Punjab and Haryana High Court and all-courts databases return no matching results.
2. The case number does not look like a real P&H High Court number. The High Court's civil writ petitions are numbered in the form CWP-XXXX-YYYY; “CWP/2024/006789” matches no order we could locate.
3. “Section PMAY-G” does not exist. The RTI Act, 2005 has Sections 1 to 31. PMAY-G is a housing scheme run by the Ministry of Rural Development - it is not a section of any Act.
4. The 9%-interest-after-18-months rule is unsupported. We found no reported judgment laying down that formula for PMAY instalments.

This is the classic signature of an AI-fabricated citation: a plausible party name, a precise-looking docket number and date, and a clean-sounding holding - none of which can be found in any real database. If you arrived here after seeing this case cited elsewhere, treat that source with caution too.

The good news: you rarely need a court ruling to find out what happened to a PMAY instalment, because the scheme's records are public by design.

Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act obliges public authorities to publish scheme records on their own. For PMAY-G this is implemented through AwaasSoft - beneficiary lists, sanction status, instalment (FTO) releases, geo-tagged inspection photos and completion status are all published on the PMAY-G portal (pmayg.nic.in) and its reports site. Before filing anything, pull your own record: see our guide to the AwaasSoft beneficiary list and reports.

Two verified Central Information Commission decisions show how PMAY-subsidy RTIs succeed or fail:

• Sanju v. State Bank of India, File No. CIC/SBIND/A/2022/664170, decided 22 September 2023 (IC Saroj Punhani) - the applicant asked, in effect, why her PMAY subsidy had not arrived. The CPIO's factual reply (the application was made in November 2021, after the MIG-2 window closed on 31 March 2021) was held sufficient, and the Commission noted: “A public authority is also not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions.” (read the decision)
• Archana Goindi v. State Bank of India, File No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/645890, decided 23 December 2024 (IC Anandi Ramalingam) - the applicant sought her eligibility status and reasons for non-receipt of the subsidy; the bank's reply that her income exceeded the MIG-I band was held to be an appropriate response and the appeal was dismissed. (read the decision)

The lesson: RTI gets you records and recorded reasons - it is not a grievance-redressal or money-recovery channel. Ask “provide the copy of…” and “provide the recorded reason for…”, never “why haven't you paid me” or “release my subsidy”. A well-aimed records request usually reveals exactly where the file is stuck, which is what you need for the next escalation.

1. Pull the public record first. Check your sanction and FTO/instalment status on the PMAY-G portal (for rural) or your bank/PMAY-U records (for urban CLSS). Our walkthroughs: PMAY-G beneficiary status check and RTI for a PMAY instalment.
2. File a targeted RTI with the authority that holds the file - for PMAY-G in Punjab that is normally the Block Development and Panchayat Officer / DRDA under the Department of Rural Development and Panchayats; for PMAY-U subsidy (CLSS) it is your lender and the central nodal agency. Draft it with the AI RTI Drafter. Ask for: copy of the sanction order; FTO number and date for each instalment released; the PFMS/bank rejection reason if a transfer failed; certified copy of file notings on your instalment; your position in the current priority/wait list.
3. Count the 30 days (Section 7(1)) with the Timeline Tracker. Silence is a deemed refusal.
4. First appeal under Section 19(1) within 30 days - the First Appeal Builder formats it for you.
5. Second appeal under Section 19(3): to the Punjab State Information Commission (infocommpunjab.com) for state/panchayat authorities, or the CIC for banks and central agencies.
6. Run the money grievance in parallel. RTI and grievance are separate tracks: file on CPGRAMS (pgportal.gov.in) or the state grievance portal, attaching what your RTI uncovered. If the record shows your instalment was sanctioned and then sat unpaid without reason, that documented delay is the foundation for a legal notice or a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 - with real evidence, not a fake citation.

To: The Public Information Officer,
O/o Block Development and Panchayat Officer, [Block, District]

Under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, please provide:

1. Certified copy of the sanction order for my house under
   PMAY-G, registration number [XXXX].
2. FTO number and date for each instalment released to me
   so far, and the amount of each.
3. If any instalment is pending, the recorded reason on the
   file for the pendency, and a copy of the relevant file
   noting.
4. If any fund transfer to my account failed, the PFMS/bank
   rejection reason recorded.
5. Name and designation of the officer with whom my file is
   currently pending, per Section 4(1)(b).

Reply is due in 30 days under Section 7(1). If any part is
denied, cite the exact exemption and my right of first appeal
under Section 19(1).

We could not verify it. As of 10 July 2026, no such judgment appears on Indian Kanoon, and the cited number CWP/2024/006789 matches no Punjab and Haryana High Court record we could locate. Treat the citation as unreliable and do not use it in any appeal or petition. If you can produce a certified copy of such an order, write to us and we will review this page.

There is no verified ruling that fixes 9% interest after 18 months for PMAY delays - that formula came from the unverifiable citation above. Courts can and sometimes do award interest on unjustifiably delayed government payments, but it is decided case by case on the facts. Build your record first: RTI out the sanction date, FTO dates and the recorded reason for delay, then take legal advice on a notice or writ.

The public authority that holds your file - usually the Block Development and Panchayat Officer or the District Rural Development Agency, under Punjab's Department of Rural Development and Panchayats. Second appeals from these authorities go to the Punjab State Information Commission. For PMAY-U interest subsidy on a home loan, address the RTI to your bank's CPIO; those second appeals go to the Central Information Commission.

Not directly. The CIC said so in Sanju v. SBI (2023) and Archana Goindi v. SBI (2024): RTI yields records and reasons, not the payment itself. But the record it yields - sanction order, FTO trail, rejection reason - is exactly the evidence that makes a CPGRAMS complaint, legal notice or writ petition effective.

Use the PMAY-G portal's public beneficiary search and reports (AwaasSoft) with your registration number - it shows sanction, each instalment, geo-tag photos and completion status. See our AwaasSoft guide. For PMAY-U CLSS, ask your lender for the claim status; see what to do when CLSS subsidy is not credited.

• Indian Kanoon searches for “Karnail Singh” + “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana” / “Awas Yojana” (all courts and P&H HC), run 10 July 2026 - no matching results
• Sanju v. State Bank of India, CIC/SBIND/A/2022/664170, 22 September 2023 - indiankanoon.org/doc/140135539
• Archana Goindi v. State Bank of India, CIC/SBIND/A/2023/645890, 23 December 2024 - indiankanoon.org/doc/119644894
• The Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 4(1)(b), 6(1), 7(1), 19
• PMAY-G portal (Ministry of Rural Development) - pmayg.nic.in

• RTI for a delayed PMAY instalment - step by step
• PMAY status stuck? The RTI route
• AwaasSoft beneficiary list and reports guide
• PMAY CLSS subsidy not credited - bank complaint route
• Bhagat Singh v. CIC - PIOs must justify every refusal
• The RTI Act, 2005 - annotated
• Case-law database - overview

For the full escalation sequence from first RTI to Information Commission, see The RTI Playbook.

Editorial verification note · reviewed by Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak · last reviewed 10 July 2026.

The case of Karnail Singh vs State of Punjab (2024) is a significant judgment on PMAY (Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana) beneficiary rights and the role of RTI in enforcing housing scheme entitlements. Here is the analysis:

1. Step 1: Case background. The petitioner, Karnail Singh, applied for PMAY-Gramin housing assistance but was denied benefits despite being eligible. The denial was based on an incomplete verification process that was not communicated to the petitioner.
2. Step 2: Legal issues. (a) Whether the state government can deny PMAY benefits without giving the applicant an opportunity to be heard, (b) whether the verification process under PMAY is transparent, © whether RTI can be used to challenge denial of scheme benefits.
3. Step 3: Court's findings. The court held that: (a) denial of PMAY benefits without notice and opportunity to be heard violates the principles of natural justice, (b) the verification process must be transparent and the applicant must be informed of any deficiencies, © the state must provide reasons for rejection in writing, (d) the applicant has the right to challenge the rejection through RTI and appeal.
4. Step 4: Significance for RTI. The case reinforces that RTI is a tool for enforcing scheme benefits. If you are denied PMAY or any government scheme benefit: (a) file RTI asking for the reason for rejection, (b) file RTI asking for the verification report, © file RTI asking for the list of beneficiaries in your area and the eligibility criteria applied.
5. Step 5: Practical implications.
   1. For PMAY applicants: If your application is rejected or delayed, file RTI with the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) asking for the status and reasons.
   2. For other schemes: The same approach applies to MGNREGA, PM-Kisan, Sukanya Samriddhi, and other schemes.
   3. For advocates: Use this judgment as precedent in cases where scheme benefits are denied without due process.
6. Step 6: How to use this judgment. Download the judgment from the High Court website. Cite it in your RTI appeal or writ petition. The key principle is that denial of scheme benefits without natural justice is unlawful.

Use AI RTI Drafter. See PMAY Subsidy Guide and PMAY Rejection Fix.