JUDGMENT 1. - As per the facts mentioned in the memo of writ petition, the petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on the business of oil extraction at Bharatpur. The State of Rajasthan in exercise of powers conferred by sub-sec. (5; of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1956') vide notification dated 23-5-1987 notified sales tax incentive scheme for industries, 1987 and exempted the industrial units from payment of tax on sales made in the course of inter-state trade or commerce, of the goods manufactured by hem, within the State. The said scheme came into operation w e. f. 5-3 1987 and was to remain in force till 31-3-1992. Again on 6-7-1989 in exercise of powers conferred by sub sec. (2) of Section 4. of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act 19)4 (herein after referred to as the Act of 1954), the State Government notified the Sales Tax New Incentive Scheme for Industries, 1989 and exempted the industrial units from payment of tax on the sales of goods manufactured by them within the State in the manner and to the extent and for the period as covered by this notification. it was further mentioned that operation of this new incentive scheme shall be deemed to have started w.e.f. 5-3-1987 and shall remain in force upto 31-3-1992. These incentive schemes were intended to give protection to certain industries by giving them tax concession and to encourage new industries in the State of Rajasthan. 2. The petitioner, believing the unequivocal promise given by the government, obtained an industrial plot No. A-6 in Bharatpur which is developed by RIICO and obtained possession thereof on 16.2.1989. The petitioner deposited the development charges and lease money to RIICO and invested a sum Of Rs. 8 lacs in the construction of building for running the oil industry and also invested a sum of Rs 19 lacs approximately on the machines. The petitioner finally set up a totally automatic plant by March, 1990 and could start its production only on and from 11.5.1990. 8 lacs in the construction of building for running the oil industry and also invested a sum of Rs 19 lacs approximately on the machines. The petitioner finally set up a totally automatic plant by March, 1990 and could start its production only on and from 11.5.1990. The petitioner moved an application on 16 5.1990 in the prescribed form along with relevant document for exempting the petitioner's production from sales tax under the Sales Tax New Incentive Scheme for Industries, 1989 but the Commercial Taxes Officer, Bharatpur refused to accept the said application plication and stated that now oil industries are not covered under the said scheme. On enquiry, the petitioner C2131: to know that the notification had been issued on 7 5.1990 by way of amend neat providing that the new Scheme will be applicable to oil extraction or manufacturer industries and thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition on 28.5 1990 seeking to get the amendment notification dates 7.5.1990 quashed. No ices were issued on 12.6.1990 to show cause as to why this writ petition should., not be admitted and disposed of. An interim stay order was also passed to the effect. that the non-petitioners were directed to continue the exemption under the Sales fax New Incentive Scheme for Industries to the petitioner provided the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee in the sum of Rs, I lac and on the condition that the petitioner maintains regular accounts on the basis of which sales tax will be calculated. The said stay order was confirmed by this court vide order dated 10 6.1991. After hearing the parties, the court observed that the provisions of notification dated 7.5.1990 shall not be applicable so far as the petitioner industry is concerned provided it furnishes solvent security in the sum of Rs. 1 lac. 3. Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents on 7.8.1990 wherein it has been submitted that the two incentive schemes were notified in public interest. Since the petitioner started its commercial production only on 11.5 19a0 and b_fore that the notification dated 7.5.1990 was issued. stating that the incentive scheme will not be applicable to oil extraction or manufacturing industries, it was within the now were and lights of the State to amend or alter the scheme in public interest. Since the petitioner started its commercial production only on 11.5 19a0 and b_fore that the notification dated 7.5.1990 was issued. stating that the incentive scheme will not be applicable to oil extraction or manufacturing industries, it was within the now were and lights of the State to amend or alter the scheme in public interest. In the scheme itself it was mentioned clearly that it may be altered at any time. Exemption is not a right and it was open to the State Government to withdraw the same in public interest Arguments have been heard. Record has also been perused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents are bound by the principle of promissory estoppel The respondents had come out with the New Incentive Should with a view to encourage new industries in the State and the petitioner believing and relying on those promises, invested huge amount in establishing the industry and thereafter, it was not proper or even open to the State Government to amend the same & exclude the oil extraction and manufacturing. industries by amendment dated 7.5.Ltd. He has percent reliance on M.P. Sugar Mills v. State of U.P., AIR 1979 SC 621 ; Gujarat State Financial Corporation v. M/s. Lotus Hotel Pvt Ltd., AIR 1983 SC 848 ; J.K. Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and others, 1986 RLR 831 ; Parnami Oil Mills v. State of Calcutta, AIR 1987 SC 590 ; Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Dharmendra Trading Co., AIR 1988 SC 1247 ; Govt. of India v. M/s. Dhanalaxmi Paper and Board Mills, AIR 1989 SC 665 ; Union of India v. M/s. J.K. Synthetics, 1989 (2) RLR 662 and a recent decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2422/1990, M/s. Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd. v. The State of Rajasthan, and others, decided on 29.5.1991 . 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further drawn my attention to the latest notification dated 26.7.1991 issued by the Government of Rajasthan issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 9 of the Act of 1956 read with sub-section 2(b) of Section 7 of the Act of 1954, making amendment in the notification dated 6.7.1989. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made at the bar and have also gone through the various authorities. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions made at the bar and have also gone through the various authorities. In view of the consistent trend of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court, there remains no doubt that the report. dents are estopped from changing the incentive scheme to the detriment of the petitioner. On the assurance and promise of the non petitioners, the petitioner established a new industry and invested huge amount. It is not necessary for me to repeat the arguments over again because I am in full agreement with the view expressed by my brother Judge, Israni J. in Patasrampuria Synthetics (supra). 7. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed, the notification dated 7.5.1990 (Ana. 3) is hereby quashed and it is held that the petitioner entitled to the benefit of Sales Tax Incentive Scheme for Industries, 1987 and 1989. No order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******