JUDGMENT :

Subrata Talukdar, J.

1. The short point in this appeal is whether the Appellants/State of West Bengal and the Respondent/the Writ Petitioners were bound by a contract requiring each of the parties to fulfil their respectful contractual obligations. The appellants/the State submit that the Memo dated 29th of April, 1977 bearing No. PW (MD)/4M-4/74/284 of the Public Works Department, Metropolitan Development Branch, Government of West Bengal issued by the Deputy Secretary to the writ petitioners does not create any binding obligation on the part of the State to lease out a plot of land in favour of the writ petitioner.

2. It would be now relevant for this discussion to quote the Memo dated 29th of April, 1977, which reads as follows:-

“Government of West

Bengal Public Morka Department

Metropolitan Development Branch

18, Rabindra Sarani, Calcutta - 1.

No. PW (10)/44-4/24/304 Dated Calcutta the 29.4.1977.

From:

Shri B.K. Dutta Roy, W.D.C.5.

Deputy Secretary to the

Government of West Bengal.

To:

Shri Hoti Lal Hohta, C/o. Bally Jute Co. Ltd.

(Mill No. 2) 102, Narkel danga Main Road,

Calcutta-700051

Sir,

I am directed to say that the Screening Committee in the last meeting considered your x application for a plot measuring 5 Cottahs and after due deliverations recommended your case for a plot of size stated above.

2. Price of 5 cottahs plot has since been revised to Rs.8,000/- per cottha excluding the extra cost locational advantages. Additional charges for locational advantages are noted on the separate sheet en.......

3. Your are hereby requested to inform this office if you are willing to take a lease of a plot measuring 5 cottahs at the price mentioned in para 2 above within 15 days from the date of issue of this letter together with an affidavit (speciman signed) sworn in before a 1st class Magistrate stating the rein separately the extent of vacant land and building in square meters held by you. Your wife or unmarried minor children jointly or severally in the Urban areas in India, if any, if nothing is heard from you within the said period, no further correspondence will be made and your case will be enclosed.”

Additional Charge for locational advantage are :

3. It is relevant to point out that attached to the said Memo were details of different types of plots namely, corner plot, road facing, plots allowing commercial usage etc. along with the additional amounts payable against the location-wise advantages of such plots.

4. The State further submits that having regard to the tenure and purport of the said Memo dated 29th of April, 1977, there was only a willingness on the part of the State to offer a plot to the writ petitioner. Such willingness cannot be interpreted to have been converted into a concluded contract. The State therefore is under no contractual obligation to grant the writ petitioner lease of a plot of land measuring 5 cottahs as stated in the said Memo dated 29th April