TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Policy of the year 1980 and 1983 the respondent was persuaded to establish its industry in the state of Orissa. On 27.4.1989 the State Government proposed revision of certain terms which resulted in revision of rate of royalty and the method of stack measurement adversely to the interest of the respondent. The respondent was not obviously agreeable and protested. The representation of the respondent ultimately prevailed with a high level committee of the State Government and on 3.10.1989 a decision was taken to not to alter the terms for supply of raw material on which the respondent had acted and established its industry. The industry continued to function, consumed the raw material and sold its finished products to the buyers in the mar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court. Before the High Court, the principal plea of the respondent was that there was no contract in writing and therefore the applicability of the principle of promissory estoppel was not established. The High Court has rightly discarded this plea. To attract the applicability of the principle of estoppel it is not necessary that there must be a contract in writing entered into between the parties. We are not satisfied even prima facie that it was a case of an error committed by the State Government of which it was not aware. The State of Orissa should have, while holding out the representation, taken into consideration the fact-who will have to do re- plantation and that the permission of the Government of India would be needed for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was impugned. The State Government came in appeal by special leave against the decision in Mangalam Timber Products Ltd. v. The State of Orissa (O.J.C. No. 7341/ 1993 decided on 16.5.1995) which was registered as C.A. No. 10664/1996. By judgment separately pronounced today in the said appeal, the appeal of the State Government has been dismissed and the decision of the High Court has been upheld. Inasmuch as the judgment of the High Court under appeal follows the decision in Mangalam Timber Products Ltd., this appeal is also dismissed. The judgment of the High Court is maintained. The interim order dated 17.2.1997 passed by this Court stands vacated. The State Government shall implement the judgment of the High Court expeditiously and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
