Jasneet Bindra,Jasneet Bindra: Expressindia; Nov 20, 2010
Chandigarh; UT Estate Office told to publicise within four weeks that certificate not required for sale of free-hold property in city
City residents planning to sell their freehold property either run from pillar to post in the Estate Office or pay the property dealer to get the no-objection certificate (NOC), which, as per their knowledge, is a mandatory document. This practice has been going on for years, but as per the admission of the Estate Office before the Central Information Commission, NOC is not required for sale or transfer of freehold property in UT as a rule.
However, the Administration brochure stating that the certificate is a must has not only created confusion, but also offered rich dividends to realtors and touts. In all this, however, the common man is at the receiving end. Newsline found that property dealers charge as per their will for the NOC and have made their own rules about its validity and consequences in case the owner has a change of mind (see box).
The fact about non-requirement of NOC came to light during the hearing of a case of complainant Chander Bhushan Anand in the court of Central Information Commissioner (CIC) Deepak Sandhu. He had last year filed an RTI application with the CPIO of the UT Estate Office, asking whether NOC was required for execution of sale deed of freehold sites, and if it was a mandatory paper for getting the legal document registered.
The CPIO replied that as per rules framed under the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952, and the Chandigarh Estate Rules, 2007, “there was no provision to obtain NOC for the execution of sale deed in case of freehold sites in UT”.
The case took an interesting turn when the complainant filed a complaint against the CPIO, saying that the information was incorrect, misleading and against the procedure followed by the Estate Office. He said, “As per instructions of the UT Administration contained in the brochure issued by it, NOC from the Estate Office was a must before execution of a sale deed.”
Anand added that as per the practice, the Estate Office issues the certificate when a person applies for it, and this was one of the documents that was required to be attached by the seller along with the sale deed at the time of registration by the sub-registrar.
When the CIC summoned the respondent on November 16, he reiterated that the NOC was not a mandatory document. The commission placed on record the submission made by him and directed to publish the correct position pertaining to the requirement for NOC on their website and notice board. She directed the respondent to publicise the information regarding issuing authority, purpose, requirement period of validity, scope and paperwork required to be completed to obtain an NOC in cases where it was required. She added that the office should also make public the cases where the certificate was not required.
“Similarly, action should be taken by the respondent to make correction in their brochure alluded to by the complainant in his written submission. The action should be completed within four weeks of receipt of the order and compliance report be sent to the commission immediately,” Sandhu added.
It’s an official procedure: DC
UT Deputy Commissioner Brijendra Singh said NOC may not be required as per rules, “but it is an official procedure that has evolved over the years”. Asserting that this practice has been there for a long time, he said NOC was a must as it ensures a fair deal. Singh, however, declined to comment when told that realtors were using it to their own advantage due to no set procedure for obtaining the certificate, and that the Estate Office employees may be bribed.
On the decision of the CIC, which has made it mandatory for the Estate Office to publicise non-requirement of NOC for freehold sites, he said, “We will follow the directions.” But he later added that they would have to first see if the commission can issue them such directions.
.JPG)
.JPG)
