PR Card Mandatory for Property Registration from Dec. But MCC Civic Group Wants to Know Why?
- PR Card Mandatory for Property Registration & Transaction from Dec- Once the draft PR card is issued, 30 days will be given for filing objections. The PR card is the government’s certificate given to the owner of the property. But MCC Civic Group Wants to Know Why this PR Card?
Mangaluru: The document released by Deputy Commissioner Sasikanth Senthil about PR Card stated that , ” The government has made PR cards mandatory for property registration and transaction in the city from December 1. It issued a notification to this effect on October 25. The notification applies to 32 revenue villages under the jurisdiction of Mangaluru City Corporation. The PR card is the government’s certificate given to the owner of the property. This is a proof of ownership of property and is created under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Acts and Rules. The card is an eight-page document on property holding”.
“The production of PR card and recording the Urban Property Ownership Records (UPOR) number during property registration and transaction will be compulsory in the city from next month. Property owners who have not applied for PR cards should do so by approaching the UPOR Project Office in the Mini-Vidhana Soudha, Opp Clock Tower, Near Town Hall-Mangaluru. . They should submit documents required for the same. This applied to apartments too. The office can be contacted on 0824- 4266222. The owners can also submit records to the staff of UPOR Project Office when they visited the houses to collect documents.The UPOR Project was initiated in the city six years ago. The city has been divided into six zones and 30 sectors under the project”.
According to Sasikanth Senthil S, once the draft PR card is issued, 30 days would be given for filing objections, if any. The final card will be sold only after addressing issues mentioned in the objections. The property owner would have to pay the prescribed fee for getting the PR card. Senthil also said once the PR card was ready, tampering with property records would be difficult. The property owner would have a clear title.
THE FOLLOWING LETTER HAS BEEN SENT TO THE “The Principal Secretary to Govt. of Karnataka, The Department of Revenue, Bengaluru, by MCC Civic Group ( By speed post with acknowledgment due) dated 9-11-2018
The Principal Secretary to Govt. of Karnataka
The Department of Revenue
Vikasa Soudha,
Bangalore – 560 001.
Dear Sir,
Sub: Request to not to give effect to the notification dated 25-10-2018 vide Ref. No. KAM/E/187/MUNOSA/2015 with respect to P. R. Cards making it mandatory for registration of deeds and documents pertaining to property transfer transactions in Mangaluru city with effective from 01-12-2018.
Ref: 1) The government circular dated 06-04-2009 vide Ref. No. KAM/E/344/MUNOMU/2008 amending the government circular.
2) The press conference conducted by the Deputy Commissioner of D.K. District on 07-11-2018.
I/We hereby register my strong objection for imposing the condition of production of the P.R. Card in all property transactions in Mangalore city as the same is uncalled for. The said condition is per se illegal. It is violative of the provisions of the Registration Act besides being discriminatory in its nature. It causes great hardship by disrupting the registration process of various title deeds in Mangaluru City.
It is quite surprising that such a major administrative decision affecting the public at large has been taken abruptly and without affording reasonable time to the people to understand the same so as to enable them to comply with the same. It is a matter of common sense that in such matters advance information shall be given to the public i.e stake holders to get the full co-operation. The people of Mangaluru city are most law abiding citizens and there is no need to impose a coercive action in this manner through backdoor. All we need is absolute clarity in advance on the procedure to be followed.
I/we do not know whether you are aware of the fact that most of the registration of various title deeds and documents happen during the months of October, November and December in view of the non-resident Indians coming over to Mangaluru City during year end to celebrate Deepawali, Christmas and new year celebrations with their families. Hence, most of the registration of deeds and documents are planned during this time and the dates are scheduled well in advance. As part of the same, pre-registration preparations like drafting the Deeds or Documents, getting the survey sketch obtained, conversion of land for required purpose, purchasing of stamp papers, obtaining necessary compliance and associated activities etc would have been made by the citizens by now.
It is also important to note here that many noble souls serving in the armed forces also plan their visit to Mangaluruduring this period. Such being the case, suddenly and abruptly introducing an amendment to the Government Order giving immediate effect is not only going to disrupt the registration process but also cause great hardship to the common man. Further, this is also going to seriously affect the local economic activities temporarily.
I/we do not see any special need or logic behind making it mandatory to produce the copy of the PR card and mentioning of the same for property transactions. I see a clean case of abuse of statutory power vested in you by virtue of being Secretary to the Government of Karnataka. This exercise is farcical to just generate revenue to the government of Karnataka. It is sad to note that in the name of computerization, digitalization and information technology vested interests have messed up property records and survey related documents in the state of Karnataka in collusion and unholy alliance with the corrupt elements in the government machinery.
I/we have following questions to you:
1. Could you please tell us in what way mentioning of the PR Card number in the deeds and documents make value addition to either the purchaser of the property in question ?.
2. What is the legal significance of this empty formality?.
3. Is there any law mandating or necessitating such a document for the purpose of transfer of property under any of laws of the land?.
4. Is there any such system in any part of the country ?.
5. Doesn’t it amount to infringement of the constitutionally protected right to property as protected under Article 300A of the Constitution of India ?.
6. Is it not a case of discrimination as only property transaction of Mangaluru city is subjected to this administrative fiat while the property transactions of the entire district of D.K. District and other parts of the state are exempted from this ?.
7. What is the public interest intended to be achieved by introducing this kind of administrative rule ?.
8. Does the department of revenue have the statutory basis under any of the existing legislation’s to enforce this rule ?.
9. From where do you derive the power and authority to do so ?.
10. Can an officer of the rank of Secretary sit at Vikasa Soudha and decide what is good and bad for the people of Mangaluru without understanding the ground reliability and proper advance hearing or pre-consultation with at least the representatives of the peoples like the MLA, MLC, Corporators etc ?.
11. Are they not the stakeholders ?.
12. Do you believe in the principle that the affected people should be given an opportunity to have their say so that they are not subjected to undue hardship?
13. Is this another case of bureaucratic insensitivity or arrogance ?.
14. Admittedly, when thousands of applications filed by the citizens are already pending before the city survey office in Mangaluru to issue the property register cards, what is the need to suddenly fix a deadline and that for the purpose of freezing the registration through the backdoor by passing the impugned notification?.
15. Is the government machinery ready to issue the PR card to all the applicants by 30th of November, 2018 if all the citizens apply?.
16. If not, do you have any moral authority or justification to fix a deadline?
17. Do you have any redressal mechanism to resolve the disputes or objections or claims within the stipulated time?. If not, how will the persons whose PR card is in the process of registration transfer his or her property?
18. why should it become a perpetual prohibition seriously infringing his or her property rights for no fault of theirs?.
19. Do you know the fact that the last minute sudden introduction of such deadlines imposing mandatory requirements will result in rush and chaos and the vested interests like property brokers will take undue advantage in collusion with the corrupt public servants?.
20. Will this not lead to unscrupulous elements in the government system to exploit the gullible commoners?.
21. How can you say that this PR card is a Property Ownership Card or proof of ownership?.
22. Does this card give a statutory right to assert the property rights in the civil courts of law against the rivals or adverse claimants ?.
23. Is there any decision-making process involved in deciding issuance or non-issuance of this PR card ?.
24. Is there any rationale or direct nexus between the P. R. Card and property transfer?
25. Will the government guarantee the title and indemnify the property owners against any third party claimants in case of litigation’s based on this P. R. Card ?.
26. Will this Government circular prevail over the statutory norms under the Indian Registration Act ?.
27. Do you know the fact that the government machinery is ill-equipped to handle this mammoth task of completing the registration of PR cards ?
28. Do you know the fact that, out of the 31,883 draft PR cards prepared 26,393 draft cards have been distributed? And, out of the 23,569 final PR cards approved, 18,491 cards have been collected by property owners, as on 08-11-2018?. The government has miserably failed to issue PR cards to more than 60,000 property owners till date. Such being the state of affairs how can you impose a restriction on the right of the property owners for registering their property transaction-related documents unless they produce property card registration numbers?
29. Where does the fee collected in this PR card for the 1,50,428 properties is going to go?
30. Are you not misleading the commoners by calling this PR card as proof of ownership?
31. To my understanding, the ownership or title is acquired by virtue of the transactions recognized under the Transfer of Property Act or other legally recognized modes of acquisition like inheritance, devolution, testamentary disposition, auction purchase, declaration by the court of law, grant by the government, conferment of occupancy right etc. In this context, on what basis do you assert PR card as a proof of ownership?
32. Is the surveyor or the project officer vested with any statutory power to decide and adjudicate the ownership rights of the property owners?
33. Is it not fraud on the people to make such false claim under the guise of government order?.
34. Are you not blackmailing the citizens?.
35. Is it not misleading the general public that the project name itself is deliberately called as the “Property Ownership Card”?.
36. Is it not appropriate to call the card as “Property Identification Card”?.
37. Are you ready and willing to disclose the source of power or authority to introduce or rather impose this condition on the property owners subjecting their property to another round of unnecessarily complication leading to litigation’s and thereby contributing to the lakhs of pending litigation’s?.
38. Can this P. R. Card be provided as proof in the court of law ?. Will you come to the court and give evidence in support of this card?
39. Is this not going to lead the multiplicity of legal proceedings?
40. If this project is such a public friendly, why are you not able to get suitable legislation passed by the legislature and introduce the same throughout the state of Karnataka?
41. I am shocked to note that the Deputy Commissioner of D K district has made an official statement to the effect that a committee has been constituted comprising of representatives from CREDAI, Civil Society and Deputy Director of Land Records?. How does a committee comprising of a trade body like CREDAI or so-called civil societies become part of the ownership-related disputes resolution mechanism?
42. What are their powers and functions?
43. What are their qualification?
44. What is the manner in which they will be selected or appointed to the committee?
45. What is the legal authority or binding nature of their decisions of this so-called Conflict Resolution Committee on the disputing property owners?
46. How will you ensure independence, impartiality and integrity of the conduct of the proceedings of such a private committee?
47. Are the revenue courts / quasi-judicial authorities bound by this card in mutation related disputes and pending cases in quasi-judicial proceedings?
48. Will you please explain a need for such a card in addition to Record of Rights (RTC) which is the result of statutory proceedings called mutation under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Katha certificate which also flows under statutory provisions contained in section 114 of the KMC Act, 1976?
49. Do you know that there are lakhs of properties in our neighboring state of Kerala where lakhs of property transaction happen every year without either RTC or Khata or 11 E sketch or even P. R. Card?
50. Do you know that the scenario was extremely citizen friendly before the introduction of either Khata or RTC or 11 E sketch in the state of Karnataka?
Instead of introducing these kinds of meaningless and directionless projects just to benefit few vested elements, please try to complete the simplest task of mistakes of thousands of RTC which had crept in the RTC’s due to the recklessness negligence of the data entry operators engaged by the agency which had undertaken the project of computerisation of RTC’s fifteen years ago under the much-hyped Bhoomi project. When the typographical errors entered in the RTC’s itself could not been corrected by the government even after one and half decade, how do you guarantee that the task of survey and identification of properties of more than one lakh fifty thousand properties will be free from errors in next 20 days time on the part of the government machinery?
Hence in the interest of public, I/we call upon you to plan the implementation of this PR project properly after getting statutory approval and by addressing all the issues and concerns raised herein above and after holding wide consultation with the stakeholders and educating the property owners with absolute clarity and thereby avoid chaos as this will not only create disruption of property transactions directly infringing the constitutionally protected property rights of the citizens but also send negative message to the investors contrary to the policy of Ease of Doing Business in the state of Karnataka and particularly the Mangaluru city which is considered to be the most promising start-up centers in India.
This P. R. Card in the present form is regressive step taking our society 25 years backward as land is an important economic component of economic growth. Instead of simplifying the land ownership and regulatory measures, you are adding fuel to the fire making the property transactions another complex affair.
Hope that you will address the issues directly to the public and till then stop the operation and execution and implementation of the amended G.O. under reference.
Given the past colossal failure of the similar projects like Bhoomi, 11 E sketch etc. the general public is under the impression that this project is nothing but forceful imposition of a condition only to a part of a section of citizens of Mangalore City.
This is bound to fail for the obvious reason that any project or law if introduced without taking the public into confidence will fail disastrously. Please note that as a law abiding citizen, I am not against any progressive steps of the government. In fact, survey of the urban properties is a most welcome step as many unscrupulous property owners have been evading payment of property tax by suppressing the measurement of their property. Further, as our cities are getting chocked with unauthorized constructions, it is just and necessary that proper urban property survey is conducted in the larger interest of the public.
However, having said that this is not the way in which such a major project is implemented by trying to impose a condition to by obstructing the registration process. If you think that this is an easy way to forcibly thrust upon the public, then you are committing a blunder as this will boomerang and you will not be able to complete this project even after 10 years besides causing great hardship and sufferance to the common man.
The government being the guardian of the citizens is expected to alleviate the pains and suffering of the citizens and not add to their woes. Such an approach is unfair in a democratic setup like India. I/we hope that this letter will touch your conscience as an administrator and you will make introspection besides reviewing the decision under reference.
In this context, it is pertinent to bring to your notice that ownership/title guaranteeing legislation is the need of the hour. This is going to bring in the revolutionary changes in the state of Karnataka. Such a legislative measure will wipe out thousands of frivolous and vexatious litigation’s and fraudulent property related white collar crimes in the state of Karnataka. This is one of the avowed objectives of the Real Estate (Regulatory and Development) Act, 2016. The said legislation wishes to bring in the new property order guaranteeing the title to the owners and title insurance which will secure the property rights of the citizens free from litigation’s. Any such progressive measure will bring in certainty and guarantee of title and eliminate fraudulent property transactions paving the way for a peaceful society free from ownership related litigations. By doing so, the very source of vexatious litigation’s could be blocked.
I/we also request you to constitute an expert committee comprising of administrators, planning engineers, legal experts and survey professionals and review the methodology to be adopted while implementing any such scheme in public interest.
I/we am sure that you will treat this letter in its proper perspective and take appropriate decision in public interest.
Note: The contents incorporated in the above report are solely the statements made by the MCC Civic Group- and are NOT those of the Author/Team Mangalorean and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of Mangalorean.com and Mangalorean.com does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.
