SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(SC) 1176

Supreme Court Of India
A.PASAYAT,S.H.KAPADIA
M.P.Mathur - Appellant
Versus
D. T. C. - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 5281 of 2005
Decided On : 11/24/2006

Advocates Appeared:
K. K. Venugopal, Sr. Advocate, Mrs. Syeda Hina Rizvi, Gopal Sankara Narayanan, Prasad Vijaykumar and Syed Shahid Hussain Rizvi, Advocates with him, for Appellants; T. L. V. Iyer, Sr. Advocate, Ms. A. Subhashini, Advocate with him (for No.1) and T. S. Doabia, Sr. Advocate, Tufail A. Khan, Ms. Sunita Sharma, R. C. Kathia, D. S. Mahra, V. K. Verma and Anil Katiyar, Advocates with him (for Nos. 2 and 3) for Respondents.

The doctrine of promissory estoppel did not apply as the public sector undertaking had to act in public interest, which included accommodating in-service industrial workers.

Headnote:

Promissory Estoppel - Scope of Resolution No.55/79 and Resolution No.139/79 - [Integrated Subsidised Housing Scheme for Industrial Workers and Economically Weaker Sections of the Community, 1952] - [Resolution No.55/79, Resolution No.139/79, Resolution No.179/79, Resolution No.35/81] - The court discussed the scope of the resolutions passed by the Board of Delhi Transport Corporation and concluded that the doctrine of promissory estoppel had no application. The court balanced the equities and found that the public sector undertaking had to act in public interest, which included accommodating in-service industrial workers, and therefore, the doctrine of promissory estoppel did not apply.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants, industrial workers, were allotted service quarters in colonies constructed under the Integrated Subsidised Housing Scheme. They sought a declaration of entitlement to the transfer of these properties after the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) rescinded its decision to sell the tenements to the occupants.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the doctrine of promissory estoppel had no application as DTC had to act in public interest, including accommodating in-service industrial workers, and therefore, the doctrine did not apply.

Issues: The court considered the scope of the resolutions passed by the Board of Delhi Transport Corporation and the applicability of the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

Ratio Decidendi: The court balanced the equities and found that the public sector undertaking had to act in public interest, which included accommodating in-service industrial workers, and therefore, the doctrine of promissory estoppel did not apply.

Final Decision: The civil appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Judgement

KAPADIA, J. :- This civil appeal is filed by the original plaintiffs and is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dated 19.2.2003 in RFA(OS)No.4/1992 reversing the decision of the Ld. Single Judge in Suit No.308 of 1983.

2. In this civil appeal we are required to consider the scope of Resolution No.55/79 dated 18.4.1979 and Resolution No.139/79 dated 31.8.1979 passed by the Board of Delhi Transport Corporation. Plaintiffs contended that a legal right was created in their favour under the above Resolution dated 31.8.79 by itself and that Delhi Transport Corporation was estopped from recalling its decision vide subsequent Resolution No.179/79 dated 3.12.79 read with Resolution No.35/81 dated 2.3.81.

3. The undisputed facts are as follows :

Between 1962-63 and 1965-66, 5144 tenements were constructed by Municipal Corporation of Delhi in six colonies of the Delhi Administration, namely, Karampura, Nehru Nagar, Giri Nagar, Vishwakarma Nagar, Hari Nagar and G.T. Road under Integrated Subsidised Housing Scheme for Industrial Workers and Economically Weaker Sections of the Community, 1952 (for short, the Scheme). Appellants herein are industrial workers and they were allotted service quarters in Hari Nagar and G.T. Road colonies. They have retired from service. However, they have continued to reside in these quarters till today. According to the appellants, 300 quarters were constructed by Delhi Transport Undertaking at Hari Nagar and G.T. Road under the above Scheme. In 1971 Delhi Transport Undertaking was converted into Delhi Transport Corporation (for short, DTC), taking 300 tenements out of the quota of Delhi Administration. In 1978 the above Scheme was amended allowing DTC to transfer the allotted houses on ownership basis to the occupants (plaintiffs). The said Scheme was sponsored by the Government of India. According to the appellants, out of 5144 tenements, 4844 tenements were transferred by the Delhi Administration in favour of the occupants. This was done in 1979. The balance was 300 tenements belonging to DTC in the two colonies of Hari Nagar and G.T. Road which remained untransferred. DTC Workers Union protested when DTC did not take steps to transfer the 300 tenements to the occupants. They threatened to proceed on strike. On 28.10.1978 a Settlement was signed under Industrial Disputes Act between DTC and the Union of workers under which DTC was given six months time to take decision on the workers demand for transferring of the tenements to the occupants. Before expiry of six months, DTC, by way of Resolution dated 18.4.1979, decided in principle to sell the service quarters to the occupants. The occupants were asked to fill up certain forms. They were asked to furnish certain information to DTC. This was done by the appellants. By another Resolution dated 31.8.1979 DTC approved the Scheme to sell the tenements to the occupants subject to certain conditions being satisfied by each of the occupants. Even in the Annual Administration Report, DTC stated that action has been taken to transfer ownership of 300 service quarters constructed under the above Scheme. According to the appellants, DTC took the above steps in line with the decision of the Delhi Administration dated 9.2.1979 to transfer 4844 tenements out of 5144 tenements in four colonies, namely, Karampura, Nehru Nagar, Giri Nagar, Vishwakarma Nagar in favour of their occupants and, therefore, the appellants herein were sure that in their case the decision to transfer the tenements on ownership basis would be implemented. However, on 3.12.1979 the Chairman of DTC requested the Board to reconsider its decision to sell in the light of increased replacement cost of about Rs.3 crores, particularly when DTC had huge accumulated losses. By letter dated 16.5.1980 the Government of India invited DTC to implement its decision to sell the tenements to the occupants. Ultimately, vide Resolution dated 2.3.1981 the DT
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top