Supreme Court orders Chandigarh administration to constitute committee to streamline sanction for mutation, grant of occupancy certificate, NOC

The Supreme Court has directed the Chandigarh administration to constitute a committee to review and streamline the processes of sanction of mutation, grant of occupancy certificate, no-objection certificate and other citizen-centric requirements including calculation of unearned profit under the Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973 and the Chandigarh Estate Rules, 2007 (Estate Officer v. Charanjit Kaur)..A Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna also held that the committee may include a Member of Parliament, an architect, an advocate, who is or has represented Chandigarh Administration before the High Court and two representatives of the Municipal Corporation apart from other officers which the administration may deem fit..The committee should “review and streamline the processes of sanction of mutation, grant of occupancy certificate, no-objection certificate and other citizen-centric requirements including calculation of unearned profit under the 1973 Rules or under 2007 Rules”.The committee shall submit report to the Administrator, Chandigarh Administration preferably within three months, the Court added.The judgment was delivered in three appeals filed by Estate Officers (appellants) in three separate cases against similar orders passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)..By way of those orders, the NCDRC had confirmed orders passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) which in turn had affirmed the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF).The respondent had sought conversion of certain plots from leasehold to freehold site on acceptance of the requisite conversion fee.The District Forum directed the appellant to convert the said plot in question from leasehold to freehold site on acceptance of requisite conversion fee and to pay compensation for mental agony and physical harassment of the respondent besides costs of litigation.The appellants had contended that the findings recorded by the NCDRC that the respondents are consumers as charges have been paid for conversion are not tenable for the reason that the charges deposited were not for any services to be rendered but to grant complete title to the allottees. Such conversion fee was in fact part of the sale consideration to confer complete title to an allottee, it was argued..The Court accepted the argument.It noted that the residential sites were allotted on lease hold basis for 99 years to the respondents. The Central Government continues to be owner of the land until the entire consideration money together with interest or any other amount is paid to the Central Government on account of transfer of any site or building or both, the Court said.Therefore, the owner cannot be said to be a trader or a service provider.“The appellant is not charging any fee for conversion of leasehold property into freehold property except the amount in accordance with the 1996 Rules, which is part of the sale consideration. It is thus a case of sale of immovable property on the terms as were fixed in the 1996 Rules. The amount so fixed under the Rules would form part of the sale consideration and not a fee or charge levied for providing any kind of service,” the judgment said..In terms of Section 14(e) of the Consumer Act, the District Forum can direct removal of deficiency in the services. The deficiency in service however does not include the transfer of title in favour of the allottee who was earlier granted leasehold rights, the Court made it clear.“As noted above, appellant is not providing any services within the meaning of Section 2(o) of the Consumer Act. The expression ‘service’ includes housing construction and not allotment of a site or a plot,” the Court underscored.The Court, therefore, allowed the appeals and set aside the orders passed by the DCDRF, SCDRC and the NCDRC..While doing so, the Court noted that the residents of Chandigarh are widely harassed while seeking no-objection certificate for sale of leasehold property as the procedure for grant of no-objection certificate and of deposit of unearned increase is interpreted in different manners by the different officials, which the officers of the Administration has failed to control.Another area of concern, the Court said is the unreasonable procedure adopted by the Administration for affecting mutation after the demise of the leaseholder or the allottee and of completing other formalities at the offices of the appellant. The difficult and near impossible procedure leads to arbitrary and discriminatory action by the officials of the Estate Office.It, therefore, directed constitution of committee to examine these issues and submit a report.“The Committee shall submit report to the Administrator, Chandigarh Administration preferably within three months. We hope that the learned Administrator will take appropriate steps to implement the suggestions made by the Committee including forwarding of the proposed amendments in the Statute to the Ministry of Home Affairs, if any, suggested by the Committee,” the Court ordered.The matter will be heard again after 4 months.[Read Judgment]