Terming the demand for no objection certificate (NOC) for sale/registration and transfer of freehold property illegal and unconstitutional,three lawyers of the Chandigarh District Courts moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court last week.
The trio sought initiation of contempt proceedings against Adviser to the UT Administrator; the UT Estate officer; Assistant Estate Officer and Joint Registrar for not complying with court directions issued in 2000. Taking stock,the High Court has converted the contempt petition into a PIL. Keeping in view larger public interest,Justice Surya Kant has held that the petition be heard and adjudicated upon by a division bench of the High Court.
The petitioners contended that in 2000,the High Court had made it clear in a judgment entitled Surinder Kaur versus Chandigarh that no objection certificate is required in relation to freehold properties. Despite this judgment,the petitioners said,the Chandigarh Administration was demanding NOC from the city residents.
When there is no condition in the allotment letters or other related documents that a person owning a freehold property in Chandigarh is to sell the same after getting NOC from the Chandigarh Administration or the UT Estate officer,no officer of the Chandigarh Administration is having business to put such limitation on the property of persons owning the same on freehold basis, read the petition filed by Advocate A S Chahal and two other lawyers.
The petitioners contended that despite having brought this (judgment) to the notice of the UT officials,no action had been taken.
As per a recent change made by the administration,for sale/registration or transfer of any property,the present owner has to obtain an NOC from the original owner. This is in addition to power of attorney. The demand for NOC,as per the UT officials,was introduced to put an end to increase in instances of fraud in sale/transfer of property.