Typical Case Of 'You Show Me Face, I Will Show The Rule': Supreme Court Pulls Up Chandigarh Estate Officers For Harassing Residents

26. The difficulty in the Administration is that the senior officers in the Chandigarh Administration are on deputation from the States of either Punjab or Haryana. The officers revert to their parent cadre after completion of deputation period of approximately three years. However, the officials continue to work at the Estate Office. Though the Administration has done commendable work to maintain the character of Chandigarh as City Beautiful, but the Estate Office has underbelly, that is, the action of the officials cannot be said to be bona fide, as is apparent in the present case. It is a typical case of 'you show me face, I will show the Rule'. On the other hand, the officers are unable to take decisions which are citizen friendly. Even no attempt is made to remove the bottlenecks in the working of the Estate Office."

The court also directed the 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.

"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 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. ", the bench added.

Thus the court issued the following directives:

1. The Administration to give details of the notices for resumption on account of alleged misuse which are pending consideration. Such details to include the date of serving of notice of the alleged misuse and the stage of proceedings pending before the different officers of Administration. A report to be submitted by the Administration thereafter in respect of the above directions within 4 months for perusal and the necessary action, if so warranted, after four months.
2. To constitute a Committee which may include inter-alia the Member of Parliament from Chandigarh, an architect, an advocate who is or had represented Chandigarh Administration before the High Court, two representatives of the Municipal Corporation and the officers of Administration.
3. Such above-mentioned 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 case was directed to be listed after 4 months for the Action Taken Report.

Also from this Judgment:

Consumer Complaints Alleging Deficiency In Service Related To Transfer Of Title Of Immovable Property Not Maintainable: Supreme Court

Case: Estate Officer vs. Charanjit Kaur ; CA 4964 OF 2021

Citation: LL 2021 SC 441

Coram: Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna

Click here to Read/Download Judgment