IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 884 of 2011 (O&M) in C.W.P. No. 17865 of 2007 Date of Decision: May 26, 2011 Union of India …Appellant Versus The Kurali Luxmi Milling Workshop Cooperative Industrial Society Ltd. and others …Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The Union of India has filed the instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent against the common judgment dated 6.2.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge, allowing a bunch of writ petitions. 2. It is conceded position that the judgment dated 6.2.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge has been subject matter of challenge in LPA No. 1484 of 2010 (Food Corporation of India and another v. Goraya Rice Mills, Kalanaur and others) and connected appeals filed by the Food Corporation of India and its officers. The aforementioned bunch of appeals came up for consideration on 23.5.2011 and we have dismissed the same by observing as under: "8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that transactions have already been completed by accepting the norms incorporated in the instructions dated 20.12.2006, it is not possible to accept the contention raised by the appellants. The letter dated L.P.A. No. 884 of 2011 (O&M) L.P.A. No. 884 of 2011 (O&M) L.P.A. No. 884 of 2011 (O&M) L.P.A. No. 884 of 2011 (O&M) 2 27.8.2007 has to operate prospectively. The question is no longer res integra. In Kusumam Hotels Private Limited Kusumam Hotels Private Limited Kusumam Hotels Private Limited Kusumam Hotels Private Limited v. v. v. v. Kerala State Electricity Board Kerala State Electricity Board Kerala State Electricity Board Kerala State Electricity Board, (2008) 13 SCC 213 , (2008) 13 SCC 213 , (2008) 13 SCC 213 , (2008) 13 SCC 213, it has been categorically laid down that the State is entitled to change its policy decision. However, all administrative orders ordinarily are to be considered prospective in nature. When a policy decision is required to be given a retrospective operation, it must be expressly stated in un-mistakable terms or it must flow from necessary intendment. In the present case, letter dated 27.8.2007 neither by express words nor by necessary intendment is to operate from an earlier date. It is often said that "yesterday's un-equals cannot be made equal today and vice-versa". Likewise, in the present case once the transaction has been completed in pursuance of the earlier relaxed specification, there is no possibility of reviewing the aforesaid transactions and apply on those transactions the new policy decision dated 27.8.2007. Accordingly, we find that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is un- exceptionable and the same deserves to be upheld. The appeals are wholly without merit and do not merit admission." 3. In view of above, the instant appeal is also dismissed in terms of the judgment dated 23.5.2011 rendered in LPA No. 1484 of 2010. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH) May May May May 26, 2011 , 2011 , 2011 , 2011 JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE PKapoor