IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JUDGMENT 1. State of Rajasthan & Others Vs. National Engineering Industries Ltd. & Another. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) NO.23/2000) D. B. Civil Special Appeal under Ordinance 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance,1949 against the judgment dated 2-5-1998 of learned Single Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No.1013/1994. 2. National Engineering Industries Ltd. & Another. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others (D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) NO.602/1998) D. B. Civil Special Appeal under Ordinance 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance,1949 against the judgment dated 2-5-1998 of learned Single Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No.1013/1994. Date of Judgment: May 28, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIV KUMAR SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Alok Sharma, for National Engineering Industries Ltd. Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. BY THE COURT:(PER HON'BLE Shiv Kumar Sharma,J.) Challenge in these appeals is to the order dated May 2, 1998 of the learned Single Judge whereby writ petition filed by National Engineering Industries Ltd. (for short the `Company') was allowed as under:- “Consequently the writ petition is allowed. Applying the principle of promissory estoppal to the instant case, I am of the view that the petitioner company deserved to be put to possession of the land which has been declared as Sawai Chak measuring 17 bighas 19 biswas falling in Khasra Nos.138/280 and 138/282 in village Bassi Sitarampura, Hasanpura and Sahjahpura which has been declared as industrial area for the purpose of industrial expansion by the petitioner company in terms of the powers of the State Government as per Section 102 of the Land Revenue Act,1956 and since the petitioner company has already been allotted the aforesaid land as early as in the years 1963- 64 the State Government and its officers are directed to make the allotment of aforesaid land to the petitioner company subject to payment of the appreciated price of the said land as of today to meet escalation cost less the amount already paid to the State Government. This direction is being given in view the fact that the State exchequer should not be put to any loss of revenue and in case the petitioner is willing to pay the sale consideration to the respondent on the prevailing price of the similarly situated lands in the vicinity of the land in question then in that event an offer shall be made by the State Government to the petitioner company within four weeks of the submission of certified copy of this order and in case any offer is made by the petitioner company in lieu of the aforesaid offer to the State Government within a period of four weeks thereafter, the respondents are directed to execute a sale deed and other such relevant documents, execution of which may be necessary to put the petitioner company in possession of the same subject to the payment of sale consideration in accordance with Rules. It is further directed that keeping in view the fact that first offer on the basis of which the allotment of the land measuring 35 bighas 17 biswas was made to the petitioner way back on December 6, 1962 on the basis of which the said land after being declared industrial area was handed over to the petitioner company, no interest shall be chargeable from the petitioner company for the past period. The respondents are further directed to declare the aforesaid land measuring 17 bighas 19 biswas as industrial area within the aforesaid period by issuing a proper notification duly gazetted in accordance with law. As regards the shifting of the cremation ground from the present site, the petitioner company is directed to shift the same to another site in the near vicinity of the land in question so that the local residents of the aforesaid villages may not be put to any inconvenience and difficulty for the same and the petitioner company is consequently directed to set apart the land measuring 1 bigha 16 biswas for the purpose of its utilization for cremation ground while the remaining 34 bighas 1 biswas of land should be declared as an industrial area by the respondents as so already notified in the master-plan of Jaipur City. There will be no order as to costs. The summoned record be sent back to the concerned department immediately.” 2. The company filed writ petition before the learned Single Judge with a prayer that notice dated February 9, 1994 issued by Sub Divisional Officer be quashed and land measuring 35 bighas and 17 biswas situated in village Bassi Sitarampura, Chak Hasanpura and Sahajpura be declared as Industrial Area and the State be restrained from making interference in the possession of the Company. 3. In the reply to the writ petition filed on behalf of Collector and SDO Jaipur it was averred that land in question was never allotted to the Company. Since Khasra No.138/279 was Siwai Chak Shamshan land it could not have been allotted. It was submitted that a recommendation for the allotment was however made but the matter of allotment was kept pending with the State Government. 4. Contextual facts depict that the Company filed an application on April 19, 1958 for allotment of land measuring 35 bighas 17 biswas for expansion of industries. Notification for acquisition of land was published in Rajasthan Gazette on April 30, 1959. After publication of notice the authorities came to know that out of the land in question the land measuring 17 bighas and 19 biswas was recorded as Siwaichak and Shamshan Land, as such no acquisition proceeding was required to be initiated. Rest of the land was already acquired by the then Urban Improvement Trust Jaipur (for short `UIT'). The Secretary Industries Department informed the Collector Jaipur for declaring the land as Industrial Area for allotment of the same to the Company. The Company deposited Rs.20,000/- for compensation to UIT as cost of acquisition. Vide letter dated January 24, 1963 the Collector Jaipur was informed to declare the land as industrial area expeditiously. Vide letter dated March 8, 1963 to Secretary Industries Department by the Company it was stated that legal formalities for allotment and its possession were yet to be made. The Company took possession of land without any order of allotment. Therefore the Naib Tehsildar Jaipur on the basis of report of Patwari initiated proceedings under section 91 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act for removing encroachment from the land measuring 5 bighas of khasra No.74 of Sahajpura. Meanwhile on the basis of decision of Secretaries on February 13, 1970 the Company deposited Rs.1 lac with UIT Jaipur on May 6, 1970 in addition to Rs.20,000/- deposited on November 23, 1962. The Company agreed to spare the land measuring 1 bigha 16 biswas of khasra No.74 for the purpose of cremation ground. The Company made request to set up cremation ground in khasra No.19 of Chak Chuhawas. Vide letter dated April 9, 1986 the Collector Jaipur requested the State Government that set apart the land 1 bighas and 16 biswas as cremation ground. The Jaipur Development Authority came into force on October 1, 1982 and according to Section 54 of JDA Act all land lying in Jaipur region vested in JDA. 5. It appears from the order-sheets drawn on the file of writ petition that on July 4, 1997 two months time was allowed to consider the case of appellant for allotment and on October 15, 1997 time was allowed to file additional affidavit. The additional affidavit was filed on November 29, 1997 wherein it was submitted that the company was holding agricultural land in excess as decided by SDO Jaipur on March 31, 1993 by which 199.78 acres of land was declared as surplus land. The appeal filed by the Company against the said order was pending before the Collector Jaipur. 6. Learned counsel for the Company criticised the impugned order to the limited extent. According to him the Company ought not have been asked to pay appreciated price of the land. Directions in regard to execution of a lease deed with limited ownership have also been called in question. Reliance is placed on Janga Ravaji Mali Vs. Smt.Nasrat Jahanbegam (1982)1 SCC 270, wherein the Apex Court held that tenant was not liable to pay any purchase price nor any mesne profits. Reliance is also placed on Aeltemesh REIN Vs. Union of India (1988)4 SCC 54, wherein the Apex Court held that discretion of administrative action vested by the Statute. In case of long inaction on the part of Government, Court may issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Government to consider within a reasonable time whether it should bring the provision into force or not. Shri Guru Singh Sabha Vs. Defence Colony Welfare Association (1993) Supp. (1) SCC 666, was also referred wherein the Apex Court held that the definite commitment made by the Government created a right or interest in favour of the appellant which Government could not have denied. 7. Learned counsel for the State contended that since the Company tress-passed over the land in question, the SDO Jaipur rightly served notice under the provisions of Section 91 read with 90-A of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act. It is further urged that the land vested in UIT Jaipur was free from encumbrances. Since UIT or JDA Jaipur was not impleaded as party to the writ petition, the direction for allotment of land and execution of lease was without any authority of law. It is further contended that the State Government formed a Committee headed by the Chief Secretary for considering the case of allotment of land to company, but the said Committee has not come to a definite conclusion and the matter is still pending. Without considering this aspect of the case, learned Single Judge directed the State Government to allot the land to Company. 8. We have reflected over the rival submissions. 9. Evidently entire material on record was not considered by learned Single Judge. How could the facts stated in the additional affidavit, which was filed pursuant to the directions of the Court, be ignored? The matter which involved the fact of shifting cremation ground, ought to have been considered and analysed closely. It was incumbent on the learned Single Bench to examine whether there was definite commitment by the State Government which created right in favour of the Company and whether there was long in-action on the part of Government which entitled the Court to issue writ of mandamus. Since the directions issued by learned Single Bench have been assailed by the Company as well as the State, we are of the view that the matter should be decided afresh by the learned Single Bench itself. 10. For these reasons, we dispose of the instant appeals in the following terms:- (i) The impugned order of learned Single Bench stands set aside. (ii) The case is remitted to the learned Single Bench with a request to decide the writ petition expeditiously in view of what indicated herein above. (iii) The parties are directed to appear before the learned Single Bench on July 29, 2008. (iv) Till the writ petition is decided the parties shall maintain status quo in regard to land in question. (v) There shall be no order as to costs. (Mahesh Bhagwati),J.(Shiv Kumar Sharma)J. arn/