9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (10) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 89, he decided to construct a cinema hall in village Dunda Hera of District Ghaziabad which had a population of less than 5000. The petitioner had made an application under Rule 3 of the U. P. Cinematograph Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), on 18th November, 1989, seeking approval of the site-plan and permission for construction of permanent cinema hall building. The District Magistrate, who is the licensing authority, granted permission under Rule 3 (3) of the Rules, to the petitioner on 20th February, 1992. Thereafter, the petitioner started the construction of the cinema hall. The petitioner had applied for grant of licence on 20th February, 1993.. The petitioner was granted licence on 9th May, 1993 and it started exhibiting the cinematograph films from 10th May, 1993. 3. It may be mentioned here that the State Government had provided certain incentives for construction of new cinema halls vide order dated 18th July, 1989. The said order applied to those cases where the application for approval of the site-plan for construction of permanent cinema building had been filed after 1st April, 1989 but before 31st March, 1994 coupled with the conditions that applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 93. The orders dated 14th May, 1992, 16th July, 1993, 22nd July, 1993, 13th September, 1993, 22nd September, 1993 are under challenge in the present petition. 4. We have heard Shri V. B. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Chandra Shekhar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respodnents. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Government Order dated 14th July, 1992 wherein grant in aid for first two years had been amended from 100 per cent to 75 per cent of the entertainment tax would not be applicable in the case of the petitioner in as much as acting on the basis of the terms incentives as contained in the Government Order dated 18th July, 1989, the petitioner had taken steps to construct a new permanent cinema hall for which necessary permission was also granted by the respondent No. 4 vide order dated 20th February, 1992. The petitioner having altered his position by acting on the promise as held out by the State Government and contained in the Government Order dated 18th July, 1989, cannot be denied the benefit of grant in aid to the extent of 100 per cent of the entertainment tax for the first two years and the Government Order dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already come into force and, therefore, the petitioner was entitled for grant in aid of 75 per cent of the entertainment tax for the first two yers and not 100 per cent of the entertainment tax. 7. He further submitted that there is no prohibition in law to review the policy regarding grant in aid. If the State Government has reduced the amount of grant in aid from 100 per cent to 75 per cent vide order dated 14th July, 1992 no exception can be taken to it. In support of this plea, he relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Pankaj Jain Agencies v. Union of India and others, reported in JT 1994 (5) SC 64; Kasinka Trading and Antoher etc. v. Union of India and Another, reported in JT 1994 (7) SC 362 and State of Himanchal Pradesh and Others Etc. v. Ganesh Wood Products and Others, etc., reported in JT 1995 (6) SC 485. 8. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that admittedly in the present case, the petitioner had applied for grant of permission for the construction of a new cinema building on 18th November, 1989 after purchasing the land on 15th November, 1989 as per Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The licensing authority, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estoppel is attracted in the present case then the petitioner shall be entitled to grant in aid under the amended Government Order dated 18th July, 1989, otherwise not. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pawan Alloys and Casting Pvt. Ltd. (supra) after examining the various decision on the issue of promissory estoppel, has held as follows : "10. It is now well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that the State authorities as well as its limbs like the Board covered by the sweep of Article 12 of the Constitution of India being treated as "State" within the meaning of the said article, can be made subject to the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel in cases where because of their representation the party claiming estoppel has changed its position and if such an estoppel does not fly in the face of any statutory prohibition, absence of power and authority of the promisor and is otherwise not opposed to public interest, and also when equity in favour of the promise does not outweigh equity in favour of the promisor entitling the latter to legally get out of the promise." 11. Thus, the State is bound by the promise which it had made in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aforesaid case the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under : "36. As observed by this Court in Shrijee Sales Corporation, even where there is no such overriding public interest it might still be open to the promisor-State or its delegate to resile from the promise on giving reasonable notice which need not be a formal notice giving the promisee a reasonable opportunity of resuming his position, provided its is possible for the promisee to restore the status quo ante. Even on this aspect the respondent-Board has no case. It has not given any reasonable opportunity to the appellants to resume their earlier position. Nor is it shown by the Board that it is possible for the appellate-promisee to restore the status quo ante. The reason is obvious. Once the new industries were lured into establishing their factories in the region catered to by the Board on being assured three year guaranteed incentive of development rebate of 10 per cent on their total bills of electricity charges and acting on the same once they had established their industries and spent large amounts for constructing the infra structure and for employing necessary labour and for purchasing raw materials etc. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
