Point of Law : Estoppel.—When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny truth of that thing.

ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition is filed under Article(s) 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby, a challenge is made against the order dated 14.07.2008, passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur in Appeal No. 117/2008 titled as Boutique Hotel (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Jaipur Development Authority & Ors.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-Jaipur Development Authority (hereinafter, JDA) has submitted that the respondent-company submitted application(s) dated 20.08.2005 and 05.12.2005 before the JDA for seeking allotment of the land in question. Thereafter, on 01.04.2006, the matter was considered by the Board of Infrastructure Development and Investment Promotion (hereinafter, BIDI). Upon paying due heed to the said application(s), BIDI resolved to approve the allotment of the land forming part of Khasra Nos. 8 and 9, situated in Village Ballupura, Patwar Circle Sumel, Tehsil & District-Jaipur. Subsequently, under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, the matter was further considered by the State Level Empowered Committee (hereinafter, SLEC) on 10.08.2006. In pursuance to the BIDI Resolution, it was determined by the SLEC that land admeasuring 20 acres was to be allotted to the respondent-company at a total consideration of Rs. 15.84 crores only.

3. Ensuing the aforementioned decision qua the allotment of land, as duly taken by the BIDI and SLEC, the JDA vide its communication dated 06.09.2006, intimated the respondent-company about the allotment so made at the consideration of Rs. 15.84 crores only, along with the other terms and conditions annexed to the said allotment. Thereafter, upon the acceptance of the said terms and conditions by the respondent-company, an allotment letter dated 11.10.2006 was issued to the respondent-company wherein a demand for the consideration payable was raised. On 08.11.2006, the amount payable was duly deposited by the respondent-company and no objection was raised qua the payment of Rs. 15.84 crores. Accordingly, on 24.11.2006, the lease deed issued by the JDA was executed and registered and subsequently, possession of the land so allotted was delivered to the respondent-company on 25.11.2006.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after having duly received the possession of the land on 25.11.2006 and without having raised any prior objection(s) qua the consideration so charged/demanded for the said allotment; the respondent-company, merely as an afterthought to contest the rate as charged and deposited without protest, filed a representation before the JDA on 11.12.2006. Furthermore, upon encountering inaction on part of the JDA qua the challenge so raised regarding the amount charged for allotment, the respondent-company filed an appeal before the learned Appellate Tribunal challenging the rates charged/consideration demanded in the allotment letter dated 11.10.2006. Upon receiving notice(s), the JDA filed a detailed reply refuting the contentions put forth by the respondent-company. However, vide order dated 14.07.2008, the learned Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the allotment order dated 11.10.2006 to the extent of the rate charged therein. The learned Tribunal also directed the JDA to decide the rates to be charged afresh, which in no case could exceed Rs. 1,500/-per square yards. Aggrieved by the said order, the JDA has preferred the instant writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has extensively argued and submitted that the impugned order dated 14.07.2008, passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal, is not just without jurisdiction but is also against the settled and well-established position of the law. In this regard, learned counsel submitted that the entire decision for the allotment of land was taken by BIDI and the State Government (SLEC) only. Whereas, the JDA, while intimating the respondent-company of the said decision along with the consideration to be paid, was just carrying out a ministerial act,