Bombay High Court
Sau. Alka Dharamachand Sawla vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secreatry ... on 2 May, 2016
Author: Vasanti A. Naik
Bench: Vasanti A. Naik, V. M. Deshpande
1 wp909.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.909/2016
Sau. Alka Dharamchand Sawla,
aged 65 years, Occ. Housewife,
R/o Sagar Apartment, Camp,
Amravati, Tq. Dist. Amravati. .....PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra, through
Secretary for Higher Technical
Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Deputy Director for Shikshan,
Prashikshan Sanstha, Amravati,
Tq. Dist. Amravati.
3. The Principal, I.T.I. Ner,
Tq. Ner, Dist.Yavatmal. ...RESPONDENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S. M. Vaishnav, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri S. M. Tembhre, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND
V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED :- MAY 2, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
Whether the State Government can refuse to name the Industrial Training Institute (ITI) in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla in breach of the solemn promise, in view of the ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 ::: 2 wp909.16.odt subsequent change in the policy, is the question that falls for consideration in this writ petition.
2. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Ner and was the absolute owner of 1.22 HR of land in Survey No.154 of Gram Panchayat, Ner. The Higher and Technical Education Department of the State Government was interested in establishment of the Industrial Training Institute at Ner and was in search of appropriate land for the said establishment. The petitioner offered to donate the land belonging to the petitioner, only on the condition that the State Government names the Industrial Training Institute at Ner in the name of her father-in-law, Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. The respondents agreed to do so and the State Government issued a notification on 04.05.2001 agreeing to name the institute as "Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla Industrial Training institute" after the land was gifted to the respondents by the petitioner as the possession thereof was released in their favour. In pursuance of the notification issued by the State Government on 04.05.2001, by the registered Gift Deed dated 15.10.2001, the petitioner gifted 1.22 HR of land to the respondents for the purpose of establishing the Industrial Training Institute in the name of her deceased father-in-law, Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. After execution of the registered gift deed, the respondents established the Industrial Training Institute in Gram ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 ::: 3 wp909.16.odt Panchayat, Ner. However, the respondents did not name the institute as 'Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla Industrial Training Institute, Ner' and instead, the institute was named as 'Government Industrial Training Institute, Ner.' The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in naming the institute in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla in breach of the promise that was made vide notification dated 04.05.2001 and the gift deed dated 15.10.2001.
3. Shri Vaishnav, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents cannot be permitted to resile from the solemn promise and the undertaking that they would name the institute as Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla Industrial Training Institute. It is stated that the petitioner had offered to donate the land to the respondents only on the condition that the respondents would name the institute in the name of her deceased father-in-law. It is stated that though the petitioner had executed the gift deed in pursuance of the notification issued by the State Government on 15.10.2001, the respondents have failed to name the institute in the name of her deceased father-in-law. It is stated that the respondents are estopped from refusing to name the institute in the name of the deceased father-
in-law of the petitioner when the petitioner had handed over the possession of the land in view of the promise by the respondents to ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 ::: 4 wp909.16.odt name the institute in the name of her deceased father-in-law and had donated the land to the respondents for the establishment of the Industrial Training Institute. It is stated that the State Government cannot rely on a policy of the year 2006 and refuse to name the institute as per the promise.
4. Shri Tembhre, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents supported the action of the respondents and submitted, by referring to the affidavit-in-reply, that the State Government had changed the policy of naming the institutes as per the nomination made by the donor and in terms of the changed policy dated 20.09.2006, the name of the donor could be displayed on a corner stone fixed on the front wall of the building. It is stated that the respondents are ready to display the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla on the corner stone on the front wall of the Industrial Training Institute. It is submitted that in view of the change in the policy, the petitioner cannot claim that the Industrial Training Institute be named in the name of the deceased father-in-law of the petitioner.
5. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the respondents were not justified in refusing to name the institute in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. The ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 ::: 5 wp909.16.odt principle of promissory estoppel could be applicable to the facts of the case. The respondents were desirous of starting a Government Industrial Training Institute at Ner and were looking out for suitable land for starting the same. The petitioner was the owner of 1.22 HR of land in Ner and offered to give the said land to the respondents for the purpose of establishing the Industrial Training Institute only on the condition that the name of the deceased father-in-law of the petitioner that is, Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla be given to the Industrial Training Institute. The respondents accepted the offer made by the petitioner and issued the notification dated 04.05.2001. The respondents agreed by the notification dated 04.05.2001 to name the institute as "Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla Industrial Training Institute". In view of the promise, the petitioner changed her position and executed a registered gift deed, donating 1.22 HR of land in favour of the respondents. It is conspicuous to note that the registered gift deed is not only signed by the petitioner but is also signed by the concerned authority of the Industrial Training Institute, Ner. The petitioner had transferred the valuable property admeasuring 1.22 HR in favour of the respondents by a registered gift deed. The respondents took the actual possession of the property on 04.08.2003 and made construction of the Industrial Training Institute on the same. After establishing the institute, the respondents named the institute as the "Government Industrial Training Institute". The action on the part of ::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 ::: 6 wp909.16.odt the respondents in naming the institute as Government Industrial Training Institute is bad in law. The petitioner had given up her title to 1.22 HR of land on the promise made by the respondents that they would name the institute in the name of her deceased father-in-law Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. It is not disputed by the respondents that they had agreed to name the institute in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. The State Government has supported their action only on the basis of the change in the policy of the Government dated 28.09.2006 by which, the State Government has decided to display the name the donor on the corner stone of the front wall of the building. The policy decision of the State Government dated 28.09.2006 could not have been operated retrospectively, so as to refuse to name the institute in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla. The promise was made by the respondents in the year 2001, that is much before the change in the policy on 28.09.2006 and the subsequent policy decision could not have wiped the actions that were concluded before framing of the subsequent policy. We find that the respondents have committed a serious illegality in refusing to name the Industrial Training Institute in the name of Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla.
Since, the facts in this case are admitted, it would be necessary to grant the prayers made in the instant petition.
::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 :::7 wp909.16.odt
6. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to take immediate steps for naming the Industrial Training Institute as "Late Shri Rupchand Dulichand Sawla Industrial Training Institute" and complete the formalities within a period of three months. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
(V. M. Deshpande, J.) (Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.)
kahale
::: Uploaded on - 06/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:37:19 :::