The Capital Development Authority (CDA) has removed the requirement for a No Objection Certificate (NOF) from its Building Control Directorate for family transfers of residential property (BCD).
In this regard, the CDA approved the Member Estate’s summary of the property manual amendments to the civic agency. By improving service delivery, the move provides significant relief to Islamabad residents.
Residents will no longer be required to obtain BCD’s NOC for non-conforming use or by-law violations in the case of family transfers and gift deeds as a result of the decision (transfer of property to family members through gift).
In addition, residents must provide an affidavit stating that any structure that violates the by-laws will be demolished within three months. Previously, the property owner had to remove the illegal structure before the transfer.
Furthermore, in recent revisions to the property manual, CDA has increased the validity period of the NOC from three months to one year. The next property owner, however, would be required to apply for a new NOC.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Pakistan imposed special costs of Rs. 500,000 on the CDA for filing a frivolous case and overburdening the court with vexatious matters, thereby delaying and denying the rightful claim to access to justice under Article 9 of the Constitution.
The 10-page decision was written by Justice Ayesha Malik and signed by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah. The decision was issued during the hearing of a CDA petition against an Islamabad High Court ruling that the disputed plot in G-8 Markaz could not be sold or transferred to anyone other than the original allottee.
This frivolous litigation is also detrimental to expeditious justice and violates Article 37(d) of the Constitution’s Principles of Policy, according to the judge.
Furthermore, the decision stated that court time is better spent on genuine cases rather than pursuing cases that are vexatious or meritless and have been resolved between the parties.
It was also emphasised that the CDA must recognise that it is not their responsibility to “fix” institutional management problems. Instead of resolving an internal matter, the authority wanted to take it to court. “For what appears to be an attempt to overemphasise one transfer while ignoring all others,” the ruling stated.