This writ application depicts the most callous attitude of the State of Assam causing loss to the public revenue. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 3. The petitioner herein is the Assam State Transport Corporation, a public sector undertaking. The State of Assam allotted a plot of land to the petitioner Corporation measuring about 93 bighas in Ulubari Village under Ulubari Mouza, District Kamrup covered by Dag Nos 278, 279 and 280 and the said area is known as Rupnagar within the Guwahati city. The petitioner Corporation took over possession of the said land and established its units. An area measuring about 13 bighas was lying vacant and the said land was developed by the petitioner by spending about Rs.19 lakhs received from the NEC in order to have a inter-State bus terminus and in support of the claim that it was developed by them by spending money, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has produced before me the records as well the other records to substantiate that they have developed. Be that as it may. The total area of 30 bighas was resumed on 30th September 1992. The Govt of Assam resumed 30 bighas of land being part of the land so allotted to the ASTC as it was lying unutilised for a long period of time. They, however, has not challenged this order of resumption. This land belongs to the State of Assam and the State of Assam has the right to resume the land. So, the order of resumption shall hold the field but thereafter the matter took a dubious turn. Out of this 30 bighas of land so resumed, 13 bighas 2 kathas 10 lechas was allotted for construction of official quarters of the employees of Cotton College. That order is available at page 30 of the writ application. That is quoted below: “I am directed to say that the ADC, Kamrup has submitted a proposal for allotment of Sarkari Land measuring 13 bighas 2 kathas 10 lechas covered by Dag No.280 (Pt) and 2 bighas 2 kathas 10 lechas covered by Dag No.279 (Pt) total being 16 (sixteen) bighas in village Ulubari, under Ulubari Mouza for construction of official quarters of the employees of Cotton College. The proposed land is recorded as reserved for Assam State Transport Corporation, but the land is reported to be vacant at present. The proposed land is recorded as reserved for Assam State Transport Corporation, but the land is reported to be vacant at present. You are, therefore, requested to furnish your view in the matter at an early date.” 4. Thereafter, some area of land was settled with Bureau of Economic Offence which is a public organisation and one bigha of land was allotted to Rupnagar Public and three bighas of land was given to a co-operative society namely, the respondent No.4 in the writ application. In this writ application we are concerned only with the allotment/ settlement of the land in favour of the respondent No.4. We are not concerned with the other allotments because these are public institutions and the land has been given to them in just and proper manner but the question is whether after having resumed the land from a public sector undertaking the land can be given to a private body at a throw away price to allow them to make wrongful gain and whether it was fair distribution of public property that aspect of the matter must be borne in mind when such distribution is made. This co-operative society, the respondent No.4 was registered on 26.6.96 and the allotment was made on 27.2.96 ie even before the co-operative society came into existence inasmuch as an application for registration of the co­operative society was made on 6.2.96. Be that as it may, on the date of allotment no co-operative society was in existence but in spite of it the allotment/settlement was made to the respondent No.4. Further, what are the aims and objectives and purpose of this co-operative society is also not known. Mr. R. Baruah, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent No.4 was asked to produce the bye-laws of that co-operative society but that also he has not been able to furnish and the settlement was made in favour of the co-operative society at a premium of Rs.30,0007 as will be evident from Annexure K to the writ application. That is quoted below: “Please refer Govt letter No. cited above. That is quoted below: “Please refer Govt letter No. cited above. I am to inform you that Govt have resumption a plot of land measuring 3 (three) bighas covered by Dag No.280 (old)/ 491 (new) of village Ulubari under Ulubari Mouza and then settled with the Tea land Housing Co-operative Society Ltd, Guwahati on realisation of 60% of the land value as premium fixed at Rs.30,000/- per katha by the Govt. Accordingly, the President of the above mentioned society have deposited the premium of the land of Rs.2,70,000 (Rupees two lakhs seventy thousand) only to the State Bank of India, Guwahati vide treasury challanNo.229dated 29.2.96 (copy enclosed). I, therefore, request you to hand over the possession of the land to the concerning authority in the light of Govt order after keeping reservation/provision of roads and drains as per norms of GMDA and also to correct the land records accordingly. A copy of possession certificate may also be furnished for records. A copy of trace map and chitha are enclosed herewith for necessary action.” 5. Thereafter, having taken the settlement the possession was taken on 4.3.96 and even on that date the society did not come into existence. The possession certificate is at Annexure L to the writ application. That is quoted below : “Possession Certificate Today the 4th day of March, 1996 the land settled with the President, Tealand Housing Co-operative Society Ltd, as per Govt letter No. RSS. 114/95/17 dated 27.2.96 and described in the Schedule below and possession thereof has been handed over/taken over as per letter of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup No. KRS. 1314/ 95/28 dated 1.3.96. Schedule Mouza - Ulubari, Village - Ulubari, Dag No.491 (Pt), Area of land - 3 (three) bighas Possession handed over Possession taken over Signature - Illegible Signature Designation Salim Ahmed 4.3.96 President, Tealand Housing Co-op Society Designation - L.M. Date-4.3.96. Ltd. Date 4.3.96 Counter Signature Sd/- Illegible Assistant Settlement Officer, Guwahati MemoNo.B.Pa.Gu: 13/91/4013 dated 4.3.96.” 6. Thereafter, this land was sold by the society in favour of the Housefed vide letter dated 26.8.98 to the writ application. That is quoted below : “Land belonging to the Tealand Housing Co-operative Society situated at Ulubari village under Ulubari Mouza described in the Schedule has been sold to the Managing Director, Housefed 11 AM of 2.9.98 has been fixed for showing the boundary of the said land. That is quoted below : “Land belonging to the Tealand Housing Co-operative Society situated at Ulubari village under Ulubari Mouza described in the Schedule has been sold to the Managing Director, Housefed 11 AM of 2.9.98 has been fixed for showing the boundary of the said land. You are informed to send representatives of your office to the spot on the stipulated date and time.” 7. It is contended on behalf of the respondent No. 4 that the land was not sold, but it was given on mortgage for Rs.15 lakhs. Be that as it may, I am not concerned with that. But I am concerned with the fact that whether this land ^ being a public property has been given to a private body at a throw away price. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner along with a land valuation certificate given by the Registered valuer and that certificate in its entirety is quoted below: “Land Valuation Report Ref. No.KCA/VI/22/99-2000 dated 17.08.99 The Managing Director, Assam State Transport Corporation, Paltanbazar, Guwahati - 781008. Ref: Your letter vide No. ASTC/2041 dated 07.08.99 for valuation of land. With reference to your letter mentioned above, we had been to Rupnagar, Ulubari on 14.08.99, for the purpose of inspecting the said land to evaluate the present market value of the plot of land. After completion of the inspection and after going through the relevant papers, we are to submit valuation report as under : 1. Name of the legal owner: Assam State Transport Corporation 2. Address: Village Rupnagar, PO Ulubari, Guwahati-781007. Dist. Kamrup. 3. Particulars of the plot of land : 3. !PattaNo:347 3.2 Dag No.: 280 (old)/491 (new) 491 (old)/768 (new) 3.3 Sahar: Ulubari 3.4 Mouza:Ulubari 3.5 Police Station :Latasil 3.6 Area of the plot: 3 bigha 3.7 Sub Registry Office: Guwahati 3.8 Orientation: North - ASTC Workshop Complex; South - Rupnagar Road; East - Rupnagar Residential Area; West - Rupnagar Road. 4. Possession of the land plot: The plot of land is under occupation of ASTC since long back and the plot of land is found lying vacant going by the records and physical findings. From the records of ASTC (Civil Wing) we found that ASTC has developed the said plot of land by earth filling. After verifying their Measurement Book maintained by Civil Engineer, we found that an amount of Rs. From the records of ASTC (Civil Wing) we found that ASTC has developed the said plot of land by earth filling. After verifying their Measurement Book maintained by Civil Engineer, we found that an amount of Rs. 19,78,876 has already made expenditure towards the development of the said plot (A photo copy sheets of MB is enclosed for ready reference). A sketch showing the subject plot is enclosed herewith in Annexure I. 5. Location of the plot of land : The plot is situated within a distance of 200 meters from GS Road, one of the good localities of Guwahati city that is near Bhangagarh Bus Stop, which have more important offices nearby. The commercial nerve centre of Guwahati, Panbazar, Fancy Bazar is within 3 KM away from the plot of the land. The plot is situated in a well developed area which has enough commercial and residential importance. 6. Salient feature about the plot land 6.1 Character of locality : Mixed Commercial & Residential 6.2 Classification : Upper Middle Class/Middle Class 6.3 Development of the surrounding areas : Fully developed 6.4 Is the locality subject to frequent flooding ?: No 6.5 Feasibility to the civic amenities : Nearby 6.6 Level of land with topographical conditions "Level 6.7 Shape of the plot: Almost rectangular. 6.8 Type of use to which it can be put : Commercial/Residential 6.9 Any restriction of usage :No 6.10 Whether leasehold/freehold : Free hold of ASTC, Govt of Assam 6.11 Road facilities : Available 6.12 Water potentiality : Available 6.13 Commercial potentiality of the property :Good 6.14 Any other sentimental/social issues which may effect the value : No Drainage: Good 7. Assessment of valuation: (a) Present market value: Guwahati is the commercial capital of the whole North Eastern Region and enjoys enormous commercial industrial and administrative importance. The city is well connected both by surface and Air with all parts of the country. In view of the above the prices of the plot of land also have an increasing in nature specifically at the posh area like Ulubari, where the subject plot is situated. Plot of land are being sold at very high rates. The city is well connected both by surface and Air with all parts of the country. In view of the above the prices of the plot of land also have an increasing in nature specifically at the posh area like Ulubari, where the subject plot is situated. Plot of land are being sold at very high rates. Considering all the factors mentioned above and also the recent trends and transaction between buyers and sellers of land in the locality, we are of the opinion that the subject plot of land should be valued at the rate of Rs.3,50,000 per katha. Therefore, the value of the plot under Dag No.280 (old) 491 (new), KP Patta No.347 Dag No.768 (new) 491 (old) measuring 3 bighas, the total price should be = 3 x 5 x Rs.3,50,000.00=Rs.52,50,000.00 (b) Market value in the year 1996: As per our in-depth enquiry regarding sale transactions of similar plot of land in 1996 it has been arrived that similar plot of land with the subject plot was sold in 1996 at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.2,50,000/- per katha. However, we accepted the minimum rate i.e. Rs.2,00,000/- per katha to arrive the value of the subject plot of land in 1996. Therefore, the value of the plot of land under Dag No.280 (old) 491 (new) and KP Patta No.347 in the year 1996 @ Rs.2,00,000/ - per katha.= 3 bigha @ Rs.2,00,000/-per katha = (3 x 5) katha @ Rs.2,00,000 per katha = Rs.30,00,000. (8) Summary at a glance: (I) Present market value of the plot measuring 3 bigha under patta No.KP 347 Dag No.280 (old)/491 (new).... Rs.52,50,000. (II) Value of the plot measuring 3 bigha under Patta No.KP 347, Dag No.280 (old X 491 (new) in 1996 Rs.30,00,000 (9) Conclusion: 1. It is concluded that the undersigned has no interest on the property valued. 2. The property is valued after physical inspection and detailed verification of the relevant papers and enquiry to the relevant matters. 3. The facts and information produced in this report are true and fair to the best of the undersigneds knowledge and belief. This report is issued without any prejudice. (Kanak Choudhury and Associates) Valuer.” 8. The valuer has valued a plot of land at a price of Rs.3,50,000/- per katha and it was given to the respondent No.4 at a premium of Rs.30,000/- per katha. This report is issued without any prejudice. (Kanak Choudhury and Associates) Valuer.” 8. The valuer has valued a plot of land at a price of Rs.3,50,000/- per katha and it was given to the respondent No.4 at a premium of Rs.30,000/- per katha. In AIR 1979 SC 1628 (Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. The International Airport Authority of India & others) the Supreme Court in paragraph 10 has pointed out as follows: “It is a rule of Administrative Law which has been judicially evolved as a check against exercise of arbitrary power by the executive authority. If we turn to the judgment of Mr. Justice Frankfurter and examine it, we find that he has not sought to draw support for the rule from the equality clause of the United States Constitution but evolved it purely as a rule of Administrative Law. Even in England, the recent trend in Administrative Law is in that direction as is evident from what is stated at pages 540-41 in Prof Wade's Administrative Law 4th Edition. There is no reason why we should hesitate to adopt this rule as a part of our continually expanding Administrative Law. Today with tremendous expansion of welfare and social service, functions increasing control of material and economic resources and large scale assumption of industrial land commercial activities by the State the power of the executive Govt to affect the lives of the people is steadily growing. The attainment of socio-economic justice being a conscious end of State police, there is a vast and inevitable increasing in the frequency with which ordinary citizens come into relationship of direct encounter with State power-holders. This renders it necessary to structure and restrict the power of the executive Govt so as to prevent its arbitrary application or exercise. The attainment of socio-economic justice being a conscious end of State police, there is a vast and inevitable increasing in the frequency with which ordinary citizens come into relationship of direct encounter with State power-holders. This renders it necessary to structure and restrict the power of the executive Govt so as to prevent its arbitrary application or exercise. Whatever be the concept of the rule of law, whether it be the meaning given by Dicey in his The Law of the Constitution' or the definition given by Hayek in his 'Road to Seridom and 'Constitution of Liberty' or the exposition set forth by Kerry Jones in his “The Rule of Law and the Welfare State”, there is, as pointed out by Mathew, J. in his article on “The Welfare State, Rule of Law and Natural Justice” in Democracy, Equality and Freedom “substantial agreement in juristic thought that the great purpose of the rule of law notion is the protection of the individual against arbitrary exercise of power, wherever it is found”. It is indeed unthinkable that in a democracy governed by the rule of law the executive Govt or any of its officers should possess arbitrary power over the interests of the individual. Every action of the executive Govt must be informed with reason and should be free from arbitrariness. That is the very essence of the rule of law and its bare minimal requirement. And to the application of this principle it makes no difference whether the exercise of the power involves affectation of some right or denial of some privilege.” In paragraph 12 the Supreme Court noted the earlier judgment of Mathew, J. and pointed out as follows : . “The Govt is not and should not be as free as an individual in selecting the recipients for its largess. Whatever its activity, the Govt is still the Govt and will be subject to restraints, inherent in its position in a democratic society. A democratic Govt cannot lay down arbitrary and capricious standards for the choice of persons with whom alone it will deal.” 9. That is what has happened in his case. In this particular case the respondent No.4 was picked up by the Govt without any rhyme and reason and settled the land with substantial value at a nominal price/value. 10. A democratic Govt cannot lay down arbitrary and capricious standards for the choice of persons with whom alone it will deal.” 9. That is what has happened in his case. In this particular case the respondent No.4 was picked up by the Govt without any rhyme and reason and settled the land with substantial value at a nominal price/value. 10. In AIR 1985 SC 1147 (Ram and Shyam Company vs. State of Haryana & others) the Supreme Court pointed out that the Govt must act in public interest, it cannot act arbitrarily and without reason and if it does so, its action would be liable to be invalidated. It is further pointed out that where any Govt action fails to satisfy the test of reasonableness and public interest, it should be liable to be struck down as invalid. The Supreme Court further pointed out h that the Govt cannot act in a manner which would benefit the private party at the cost of the State and such action would be both unreasonable and contrary to the public interest. 11. Whenever the Govt makes a settlement with a private person it must do so fairly and without discrimination and without unfair procedure. There is no urgency and/or public demand that this settlement had to be made in favour of a respondent No.4 at a throw away price. It was picked up as a blue eyed boy by the authority and that does not satisfy the test laid down by the Apex Court in making such settlement. 12. Mr. PG Baruah, learned Advocate General for the State of Assam submits that as the order of resumption has not been challenged in this writ . application, the question of subsequent settlement in favour of the respondent No.4 cannot be assailed by the petitioner and he urges that the petitioner has no locus standi to question the settlement in favour of respondent No.4.1 do not understand this argument. If any illegality and/or injustice comes to the notice of the writ Court it is obligation and duty of the writ Court to wipe out that injustice, if possible. That is the law laid down by the Apex Court in AIR 1997 SC 645 (Air India Statutory Corporation etc vs. United Labour Union & others) wherein in paragraph 59 the Supreme Court pointed out as follows : “59. That is the law laid down by the Apex Court in AIR 1997 SC 645 (Air India Statutory Corporation etc vs. United Labour Union & others) wherein in paragraph 59 the Supreme Court pointed out as follows : “59. The founding fathers placed no limitation or fetters on the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution except self imposed limitations. The earn of the Court is long enough to reach injustice wherever it is found. The Court as sentinel in the qui vive is to met out justice in given facts.” 13. So, this objection regarding locus standi falls through. Sri R. Baruah, learned Advocate for the respondent No.4 submits that there was no malafide and price was fixed by the Govt after taking due consideration of market value but I find that the settlement was made in favour of the respondent No.4 without any rhyme and reason at a throw away price. The market value is much higher. The market value was fixed at a lower range without proper enquiry for the benefit e of respondent No A. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ application as follows : (i) The order of resumption passed by the State of Assam shall hold the field and that is valid exercise of power. (ii) The settlement made of the land resumed in favour of the respondent No.4 vide Annexure K and subsequent delivery of possession and other action shall stand quashed and this land now shall stand revert back to the State of Assam and the State of Assam may make settlement of it to any other public institution and preferably not to any private institutions/individual to allow them to make wrongful gain at the cost of the public. It is needless to say that the order of settlement in favour of respondent No.4 is quashed, he will be entitled to get back the amount of premium so paid by him within a reasonable time on demand.The State of Assam shall take back the possession of the land immediately, preferably within 15 days. (iii) It is submitted by Mr. Deka, learned Advocate for the petitioner that he has already invested a huge sum of money for the development of this land. (iii) It is submitted by Mr. Deka, learned Advocate for the petitioner that he has already invested a huge sum of money for the development of this land. For that the Corporation may approach the Govt with proper representation and the Govt may consider the case according to its wisdom but I am not issuing any instruction. No costs.