38 yrs on, 83-yr-old woman may finally own her house

CHANDIGARH: The decision of Chief Administrator-cum-Finance Secretary Ajoy Kumar Sinha setting aside an order passed by the Estate Office for charging a transfer fee of Rs 81 lakh on account of re-transfer of a property has revived the hope of 83-year-old Bimla Devi, who has been fighting for the transfer of the property in her name for the past 38 years.

Bimla Devi has been waging a long battle to get the property transferred in her name. Tribune Photo: Manoj Mahajan

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, October 3

The decision of Chief Administrator-cum-Finance Secretary Ajoy Kumar Sinha setting aside an order passed by the Estate Office for charging a transfer fee of Rs 81 lakh on account of re-transfer of a property has revived the hope of 83-year-old Bimla Devi, who has been fighting for the transfer of the property in her name for the past 38 years.

This is a unique case in which the Estate Office failed to transfer the property for the past 38 years, ignoring the orders of the Chief Administrator and the Adviser to the Administrator.

Finally, last week, the Chief Administrator directed the Estate Officer to consider the case of the applicant afresh and take a judicious decision in the matter taking into consideration the earlier orders passed by the Chief Administrator and the Adviser to the Administrator within four months.

Bimla Devi, a resident of Sector 19, challenged the decision of the Estate Office, dated December 19, 2016, issued by the Assistant Estate Officer whereby the appellant was asked to deposit transfer charges of Rs 81 lakh on account of re-transfer of House No. 1242, Sector 19-B.

Bimla Devi purchased the site in an open auction in 1974, but she failed to make the entire payment. The Estate Office cancelled the site on December 18, 1976. The appellant then filed an application on February 22, 1980, requesting the Estate Office to re-transfer the plot under Rule 21 of Chandigarh Leasehold of Sites and Building Rules. She also deposited Rs 25,000, which was accepted by the Estate Officer. The Estate Office again demanded the outstanding dues from the applicant. Later, the Estate Office, vide a letter dated June 9, 2008, rejected her claim as Rule 21 of the Chandigarh Leasehold of Sites and Building Rules stood repealed by the Administration in 2007.