JUDGMENT Mr. Surya Kant, J. (Oral):- The only question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether the petitioner is eligible for allotment of a plot in Aerocity notified by the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (for short ‘the GMADA’) in the reserved category of disabled persons? 2. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner is admittedly a permanent resident of Yamuna Nagar in the State of Haryana. He is a differently abled person and a certificate to this effect has been issued in his favour by the Civil Surgeon, Yamuna Nagar. 3. The GMADA-Statutory Authority in the State of Punjab invited applications for allotment of residential plots in Aerocity in SAS Nagar Mohali and as per the Information Brochure, some of the plots were reserved for ‘disabled persons’. The relevant clause in the Information Brochure requiring the applicants to submit additional documents in case of reserved categories, reads as follows:- “Code Category Documents D Disabled person’ as defined by the Disability Certificate issued by the persons with Disabilities (Equal competent authority, i.e., Civil Surgeon Opportunities, Protection of Rights of the concerned District or any other and Full Participation) Act, 1995. authority as prescribed by the Government of Punjab.” 4. The petitioner applied in the reserved category of ‘disabled persons’ and was successful in draw of lots. The GMADA, however, has refused to issue Letter of Intent and has rejected his representation on the ground that he being a non-resident of State of Punjab, is ineligible to avail the benefit of reservation meant for disabled persons. 5. It is in this backdrop that the question raised at the outset needs to be determined. 6. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, “disability certificate issued by the Competent Authority i.e., the Civil Surgeon of the concerned district” is sufficient to declare the petitioner eligible as the words, ‘Government of Punjab’ referred to in the above reproduced clause cannot be read with the first part of the clause. We are, however, unable to agree with the learned counsel. We are, however, unable to agree with the learned counsel. According to us, the disability certificate required to be attached by an applicant must have been issued either by the Civil Surgeon of the concerned district or any other Authority as prescribed by the Government of Punjab which necessarily mean the Civil Surgeon in the State of Punjab or any other Authority (other than the Civil Surgeon) as may be prescribed by the Government of Punjab. The principal factor to be kept in view is behind a nonconstitutional reservation is also to ensure adequate representation in different spheres of life to those who on an objective survey/assessment are found to be less represented. Such an exercise, while providing reservation for disabled persons in the State of Punjab, is relatable to the residents of the State of Punjab only. 7. Dismissed. 8. The petitioner, however, shall be entitled for the refund of the amount deposited by him alongwith interest as may be permissible under the Rules for which liberty is granted to him to approach the GMADA authorities. ---------0.B.S.0------------