JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order of a Division
Bench of the Guwahati High Court dismissing the writ appeal
filed by the appellant.
(2.) The factual position is very interesting and needs to be
noted in some detail.
A Writ Petition was filed by the respondent claiming that
the State Government had promised to purchase 500 sets of
'North Eastern Region Local Acts and Rules' from it. But
contrary to its promise it had refused to place any order. The
prayer in the writ petition was for a direction to the present
appellant and its functionaries to maintain and keep the
promise made by them to the respondent in respect of printing
and supply of 500 sets as noted above. It was stated that the
then Law Minister had assured the respondent through its
proprietor to purchase the books and had given green signal
for publishing and printing of the compilation of local laws at
the relevant period and had promised that if they publish
those the government of Arunachal Pradesh will purchase at
least 500 sets of local Acts and Rules. It was submitted that
in view of the direction given by this Court in All India Judges'
Association and Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC
165] and in All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of
India & Ors. [AIR 1993 SC 2493] such promise was made. It
according to the writ petitioner is a clear case where principles
of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation applied. The
stand was resisted by the present appellant contending that
there has been manipulation of the notes. The alleged note
does not indicate that there was any promise or order for
printing/publishing the book. It was merely a departmental
note sent to the Planning/Finance/Law Department from the
Chief Minister for examination. Further the Minister had
specifically stated (in the note) that 400 copies of one book
containing all the North Eastern Regional Local Acts and Rules
of Rs.400/- each (total value of Rs.1,60,000/-) could be
purchased as the publisher on his own told that he has
published such Acts and Rules. This according to the present
appellant established that the then Law Minister had never
ordered to undertake publication and supply thereafter of 500
sets of such books. The mind of the then law Minister was
clear as to the procedure to be adopted. It was further pointed
out that on the body of the respondent's letter dated 27th
April, 1997 the words/Figures '500 volumes' (in the third line
of the Minister's note) appears to be interpolated by the words
'500 sets' by obliterating the word 'volume' by using a white
erasing ink and writing over their 'sets' by hand. It was
pointed out that the cost involvement would be about a crore
of rupees as the price of the books as claimed was nearly 40
lakhs and with escalation of price it was likely to reach Rupees
one crore. It was further submitted that the Writ Petition
deserves to be dismissed. The High Court observed that
though there appear to be over writing, but the normal
practice is that books are purchased in sets and therefore,
even if there was any interpolation the same was intentionally
done to correct the error. The Writ Petition was, therefore,
allowed purportedly holding that the principles of promissory
estoppel applied. As noted above, the writ appeal was filed by
the appellant which was dismissed by the impugned
judgment.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
learned Single Judge and the Division Bench clearly
overlooked the position in law that when a claim is founded
on disputed document, the writ petition is not to be
entertained. Additionally there was no question of any
promissory estoppel involved. The document relied upon by
the respondent was a departmental note. The same need
approval of the various departments. The books were not
useful for the judicial officers and, therefore, there was no
need for placing any order.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.