Sau. Alka Dharamachand Sawla vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 2111 Bom

                                                            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

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

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

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

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

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.

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