JUDGMENT B.K. Sharma, J. 1. The 33rd National Games-2005 which is scheduled to be held in Assam, on and from 12.11.2005 is at stake over an issue which is the subject matter of dispute in this writ proceeding. 2. The Petitioner No. 1 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at 6/1 A, Sashi Bhushan Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-34. The primary objective of incorporation of the Petitioner No. 1 is stated to be to create an institutional frame work which would act as an enabler, facilitator and catalyst for infrastructural development in the country. The company is represented by the Petitioner No. 2. 3. The 33rd National Games-2005 is scheduled to be held in Assam at Guwahati on and from 12.11.2005 and for the purpose, as per direction of the Indian Olympic Association, a National Games Village is required to be constructed to accommodate about 10,000 athletes and officials who are likely to participate in the National Games. The Respondent No. 2 being the nodel agency responsible for holding the National Games, initially invited bids for the construction of the Games Village. However, none of the bids offered for the purpose was acceptable to the Respondents. Some of the bidders apart from failing in other aspects, also sought financial assistance from the State. Thus the whole exercise failed. 4. It was at that stage the Petitioners came forward showing their interest in taking up the National Games Village project and introduced themselves to the senior officials of the Government of Assam, which they met during the 2nd North East Business Summit held in the month of January, 2004. The Petitioners undertook to complete the project with almost expedition facilitating holding of the National Games. The Respondents also showed keen interest in the matter and they were also influenced by the fact that the Petitioners have entered into a consortium with two Singapore Government linked companies. The Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata wrote a letter to the Chief Minister of the State introducing the Petitioner No. 1 and its consortium partners of Singapore, supporting their abilities, competence and capability to take up the said project at Guwahati. The Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata wrote a letter to the Chief Minister of the State introducing the Petitioner No. 1 and its consortium partners of Singapore, supporting their abilities, competence and capability to take up the said project at Guwahati. A team of the Petitioner No. 1 including the associates from Singapore and the Secretary, Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata paid a visit to Guwahati on 10 and 11 March, 2004 to explore the possibility of taking up the said project. The representatives of the Respondents held meeting with the Petitioners and the Minister of Sports and Youth Welfare categorically mentioned during the meeting that the project was to be taken up as the first priority. Having regard to the extreme urgency in the matter, the members of the Petitioner No. 1 were shown the project site at Easistha, Mouza-Beltola, measuring about 68 Bighas, I Katha, 14 Lessas situated at a distance of about 2 Km from the main stadium complex at Sarusajai. The Respondent No. 2 by its letter dated 12.3.2004 addressed to the Petitioners expressed its desire for a positive response in the matter at the earliest enabling it to proceed further in the matter. The letter is quoted below: NATIONAL GAMES SECRETARIAT 33rd NATIONAL GAMES-2005 Rudra Singlia Sports Complex, Dispur, Guwahati-781006 No.NGS/GV/01/2004, Dated March 12, 2004 Mr. R.S. Agrawal Managing Director Pragati Growth and Development Ltd., 9, APEEJAY Business Centre, ‘A’ Block 8th floor 15, Park Street, KOLKATA-7000 16 Dear Mr. Agrawal, I on behalf of the National Games Secretariat, would like to express our sincere gratitude to you and your entire team including your HDD associates from Singapore and the Secretary General, Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata who paid a visit to Guwahati on 10th and 11th March, 2004 to explore the possibility of taking up some development projects related to the forthcoming National Games, 2005. In course of our discussions it was fairly clear that out of the projects proposed by us, Hon'ble Minister of State for Sports and Youth Welfare, Capt. RN. Bordoloi, had mentioned the "Games village" project to be taken up as the first priority, and accordingly you were shown the proposed site near the National Highway which is only 2 kms away from the main Stadium complex at Sarusajai, where the construction work has just started. RN. Bordoloi, had mentioned the "Games village" project to be taken up as the first priority, and accordingly you were shown the proposed site near the National Highway which is only 2 kms away from the main Stadium complex at Sarusajai, where the construction work has just started. We are happy that you could organize the trip at such a short notice and I am directed by the Hon'ble Minister to inform you that Govt. of Assam would look forward to such an initiative and facilitate speedy execution of the Games Village Project by providing all the necessary support. We would look forward to your response at the earliest so as to enable us to proceed further in the matter. Thanking you, With kind regards, Sincerely yours Sd/- (A.K. Absar Hazarika) Office on Special Duty National Games Secretariat. 5. As per the Governments made in the writ petition, the Petitioners have already signed a memorandum of understanding with the Government of West Bengal for execution of another land mark project in collaboration with the said Singapore Government linked companies and that they are keen to take up the National Games Village project in collaboration with the said companies viz. Surbana, a subsidiary of HDBB corporation (International), wholly owned by the Housing Development Board, Government of Singapore and Sembcorp, a Singapore Government linked company. Responding to the aforesaid letter of the Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner company sent its Letter of Expression of Interest on 13.3.2004 undertaking the responsibility of planning, financing, constructing and marketing the project. It was also proposed that a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) would be incorporated as a company under the Companies Act, 1956 and that the proposed land, free from all encumbrances, would be transferred to the newly created SPY on reason able terms in order to facilitate the commencement and completion of the project. It was emphasized in the letter that any amount of delay in the matter would frustrate the project. 6. In response to the said letter dated 13.3.2004, the Respondent No. 2 by its letter dated 19.3.2004, issued the Letter of Intent to the Petitioners for development of the project whereby the Government confirmed its intention to engage the said consortium to plan, finance, develop, construct and sell the proposed infrastructure of the National Games Village. 6. In response to the said letter dated 13.3.2004, the Respondent No. 2 by its letter dated 19.3.2004, issued the Letter of Intent to the Petitioners for development of the project whereby the Government confirmed its intention to engage the said consortium to plan, finance, develop, construct and sell the proposed infrastructure of the National Games Village. The Government also informed that necessary steps were being taken for transfer of land to the Respondent No. 2 for further transfer to SPV. The said letter of intent underlined the following modalities to be followed for the development of the project: (a) There shall be no financial contribution from the Respondent No. 1 or the Respondent No. 2. (b) The development work could be undertaken by a company acting as SPV to be formed for the purpose that the Petitioner and allied investors invest in the equity and other financial instruments of SPV. (c) SPV with the collaboration and assistance of the Respondent No. 2 would execute the project and the land component duly valued by the Government of Assam would be exchanged for cash equity debt or other consideration to be paid by SPV. (d) Necessary financial resources would be brought in/arranged by the Petitioner. (e) Apart from the financial resources brought in by the Petitioners and its associates, institutional funding would be pre-arranged by the Petitioner against creation of charge on the project land. (f) Suitable sale/development agreement would be entered between the Respondent No. 2 or any other competent authority as may be appropriate with the Petitioner or achieving the above objectives. (g) The consideration to be paid by the Petitioners or by SPV on behalf of the Petitioners for transfer of the land where the project was to be executed, would be a mix of cash, equity, debt and other considerations as may be mutually agreed upon by the Respondents and the Petitioners. 7. The only responsibility undertaken by the Respondent No. 2 was to provide civil utilities, such as, power and water at the site of construction and to make arrangement for necessary sanctions, approvals, permissions etc. as would be required from the authority on top priority to ensure timely completion of the project. 7. The only responsibility undertaken by the Respondent No. 2 was to provide civil utilities, such as, power and water at the site of construction and to make arrangement for necessary sanctions, approvals, permissions etc. as would be required from the authority on top priority to ensure timely completion of the project. The Respondent No. 2 by its aforesaid letter dated 19.3.2004 clarified that the National Games Village project would accommodate approximately 10,000 persons with reasonable comfort and facility and ought to be ready by 31st, October, 2005 so that the athletes and other officials could be accommodated for a period of approximately one month during the National Games. It was also stated in the letter that a formal agreement incorporating the terms and conditions as contained in the letter should be executed within 30 days from the date of the said LOI. 8. After the issuance of the aforesaid LOI, the Petitioners entered into a formal understanding with its Singapore Associates and also started detailed negotiations with the investors and with the public financial institutions including the Assam Industrial Development Corporation. In the meantime, the Singapore High Commission in Delhi by its Fax dated 3.5.2004 addressed to the Chief Minister of the State intimated about the credentials and background of the aforesaid two companies i.e. Surbana and Sembcorp and ratified their association with the Petitioner company. 9. In between, on 2nd April, 2004, a meeting was held amongst the officials of the Government of Assam, Respondent No. 2 and the Petitioners. During the course of discussion, the Minister of Sports under whose Chairmanship the meeting was held apprised the members about the proposals for appropriate steps for transfer of the land in question to SPV promoted by the Petitioners. It was also informed in the meeting that some apartments would be made available to the department for accommodation of its senior officers at concessional rate as consideration for transfer of the land for the project. By a communication dated 6.4.2004, the Respondent No. 2 informed the Petitioners that the decision arrived at in the said meeting held on 2nd April, 2004 has been brought to the notice of the chief Minister and he has accorded approval to the same. The Petitioners were requested to take necessary action to sign the agreement at the earliest. By a communication dated 6.4.2004, the Respondent No. 2 informed the Petitioners that the decision arrived at in the said meeting held on 2nd April, 2004 has been brought to the notice of the chief Minister and he has accorded approval to the same. The Petitioners were requested to take necessary action to sign the agreement at the earliest. The Petitioners having regard to the urgency in the matter entered into a consortium agreement with its said two Singer Associates. The scope of work of the said two Associates was incorporated in the agreement. In addition and in terms of the understanding arrived at with the State Government, the SPV in the name of Asom Pragati Infrastructural Development Limited was also incorporated with its registered office at Guwahati. 10. As per the averments made in the writ petition, the Singapore companies agreed to commit to the deadline towards completion of the project only on assurance that the Government of Assam and the Petitioners would do everything within their power to facilitate the timely completion of the prestigious project. The Petitioners informed the Respondent No. 2 by their letter dated 12.4.2004 that a draft of the agreement to be entered into between the Respondent No. 2 and the Petitioner and with the Water Resources Department under whose possession the land in question is and the said SPV as the confirming parties has been prepared alongwith the documentation for priority allotment of apartments/flats to the Water Resources Department and conveyance of the identified land to SPY. The draft agreement was enclosed alongwith the letter. The Petitioners also informed by the said letter that they have secured necessary financial arrangements for taking up the project. The Petitioners requested for completion of the formalities in respect of the conveyance of the land to SPY at the earliest specifying 15th April, 2004 as the date of completion of documentation and handing over of possession of the land earmarked for the project. It was also proposed in the letter that a foundation stone laying ceremony would be held on or around 28.4.2004 to be laid by the Chief Minister of the State in presence of all the important dignitaries and the officials of the State. 11. It was also proposed in the letter that a foundation stone laying ceremony would be held on or around 28.4.2004 to be laid by the Chief Minister of the State in presence of all the important dignitaries and the officials of the State. 11. It is the further case of the Petitioners that instead of showing any immediate response to the said proposal of the Petitioners, the Respondents only on 5.5.2004 asked the Petitioners to be present in a meeting to be held on 7.5.2004 with the Chief Secretary, Assam in connection with the project. The Managing Director of the Petitioner company duly attended the meeting with the Chief Secretary in presence of the other high officials of the State Government. In the meantime the Petitioners completed the survey of the entire land at its own cost so as to expedite the commencement and completion of the project in time. The Petitioners also entered into a formal agreement with its Singapore Associates and also sent to the Respondents all the draft agreements to be executed by and between the parties enabling the commencement of the project. In the meantime the Indian Chamber of Commerce by its letter dated 6.5.2004 addressed to the Chief Minister of the State expressed its happiness that the project would be a milestone, particularly, with the involvement of the Petitioners with the Singapore partners. It underlined the amount of goodwill that the project would create for other influential investors of the State and in view thereof, hoped that the project would commence shortly. 12. Surbana, one of the consortium partners of the Petitioners by their letter dated 4.5.2004 intimated the Petitioners that the consortium agreement has been signed with Surbana and Sempcorp with the Petitioners on the basis of the assurance that the project has received the necessary permission and that the consortium would be in a position to start the work at an early date. However, the consortium partners expressed their regret that a confirmation regarding the completion of the formalities for transfer of the land has not been received. It was also brought to the notice of the Petitioners that in the event of any further delay, the feasibility of meeting the deadline may have to be reviewed afresh which, in turn, may lead to unavoidable complications. 13. It was also brought to the notice of the Petitioners that in the event of any further delay, the feasibility of meeting the deadline may have to be reviewed afresh which, in turn, may lead to unavoidable complications. 13. Amidst the aforesaid developments, deliberations and discussions by and between the parties, the Petitioners were made to understand that the price of the land proposed to be transferred to SPV would be Rs. 71,000/- per katha. Such a fixation of price was stated to be on the basis of cost of the acquisition of land in and around the area in which the land in question is situated. According to the Petitioners, although the acquisition costs was much less than the said price, the Government decided to settle the price at Rs. 71,000/- per Katha which was al acceptable to the Petitioners. The Government of Assam, however, decided to form a Core Committee, for the purpose of scrutinizing the entire process of execution of the said project. The scope of the Core Committee, inter alia, included the ascertainment of the credentials of the Petitioner company for execution of the project and fixation of the value of the land which was proposed to be transferred to SPV to be promoted by the Petitioners. The Core Committee was chaired by the Additional Chief Secretary of the State and consisted of the following members: (a) The Financial Commissioner; (b) The revenue Commissioner; (c) The Land Revenue and Judicial Secretary; (d) The Head of Technical Committee; (e) The Sports Secretary and Secretary General of the Respondent No. 2; (f) The Secretary of Water Resources Department; (g) The Deputy Commissioner (Metro), Kamrup and District Magistrate, Guwahati; The Advocate General of the State of Assam was made the advisor of the core committee. 14. The Core Committee upon deliberations made certain recommendations and the Respondent No. 2 communicated the same to the Petitioners by letter dated 17.5.2004 (Annexure-XIII). The observations of the core committee as contained in the said communication dated 17.5.2004 are as follows: To M/s. Pragati Growth and Development Ltd. 09 Apeejay Business Centre A-Block, Floor, 15 Park Street Kolkata-700016 (India) Sub: Construction of Games Village. Dear Sir, I am directed to intimate you the following observation of the Core Committee for submission of your views at the earliest. Dear Sir, I am directed to intimate you the following observation of the Core Committee for submission of your views at the earliest. (i) The Singapore based Companies which are partners of the consortium led by M/s. Pragati should also be made parties to the Main Agreement. (ii) The Revenue Department of Govt. of Assam has only recently fixed the land valuation in the revenue Village at Basistha at Rs. 1.30 Lakhs per katha and in view of the purpose for which the land is sought to be transferred to M/s. Pragati the State Govt. would consider to transfer of land to M/s. Pragati at a price not below Rs. 1.30 Lakhs (one lakh thirty thousand) only per katha. (iii) The Core Committee recommended an earnest money of Rs. 5(Five) crore (almost equal to the value of the land) to be deposited by M/s. Pragati in the form Bank Guarantee to the Govt. which would be forfeited if the land is not used for the purpose for which it was transferred or sold. (iv) The National Games-2005 are due to start on 12th Nov. 2005. Therefore, the Committee specified that the construction of games village should be completed in ail respect with a provision to accommodate 10,000(Ten Thousand) personnel in 800 units and handover the apartments to NGS by the 1st of Oct. 2005 for a period of 2 (two) months or so. (v) The M/s. Pragati will make available the accommodation for 10,000(Ten thousand) personnel free of cost for the period of two months. (vi) The Committee recommended for inclusion of provision for definite milestones of the construction of the Games Village. Such milestone should be periodically reviewed jointly by both the parties so that the progress of construction work of the Games Village could be assessed and in case of not achieving desired level of progresses of construction works. NGS shall be entitled to impose liquidated damages on M/s. Pragati if milestone are not achieved. The details of the milestone would be mutually decided and determined by M/s. Pragati and NGS shall be fixed before the commencement of the said project. (vii) In order to protect Govt. interest and to ensure timely completion of the construction of Games Village the Core Committee recommended the provision for laying liquidated damages by NGS @ Rs. The details of the milestone would be mutually decided and determined by M/s. Pragati and NGS shall be fixed before the commencement of the said project. (vii) In order to protect Govt. interest and to ensure timely completion of the construction of Games Village the Core Committee recommended the provision for laying liquidated damages by NGS @ Rs. 3,00,000(Rupees three lakhs only) per day of delay subject to the extent of 25% (twenty five percent) of the total value of the said land in the event of delay in achieving the milestone or in handing over the National Games Village complex to NGS for the purpose and in the manner as specified under different clauses of the Agreement. (viii) To ensure timely completion of the Games Village for the conduct of National Games the NGS could provide necessary administrative support to the builder in obtaining various facilities like electrical, water connection and in the procurement of construction materials like Stone, Sand, Timber etc. However, the assistance of the Govt. shall not extended to any financial support nor guaranteed assurance of supply of construction materials etc. The above observation and term of references of the Core Committee are forwarded to you for your information as well as to intimate your views on the same for onward submission to Govt. kindly submit your views/replies at the earliest possible time. Yours faithflilly (P. Hazarika) Commissioner and Secretary; Sport 15. Accepting the recommendation made by the Core Committee relating to the price of the land at Rs. 1.30 lakhs per Katha and other conditions, the Petitioner requested the Respondent No. 2 by their letter dated 17.5.2004 to grant the following concessions: The Commissioner and Secretary, Sport Government of Assam/and Secretary General National Games Secretariat, Rudra Singha Sports Complex Dispur, Guwahati-78 1006. Dear Sir, This is in response to you letter No. NGS/IN-FRA/GV/1/2003/135 dated 17 May, 05. Our replies are as follows: (1) The basis of association of Singapore Companies with the project is already contained in the Consortium Agreement which will be a part of the main agreement. The documents in support thereof has already been submitted to your office. If we peruse the consortium agreement, it may be noted that M/s. Surbana and M/s. Sembcorp are binding themselves for their respective responsibilities. One cannot loose the spirit of specialist consultants and service providers viz. The documents in support thereof has already been submitted to your office. If we peruse the consortium agreement, it may be noted that M/s. Surbana and M/s. Sembcorp are binding themselves for their respective responsibilities. One cannot loose the spirit of specialist consultants and service providers viz. Master Planners and Architects and Construction Managers for this mega project. Since, they have already signed the Consortium Agreement, the insistence on their signing the main agreement is not necessary. (2) We have put forward our views vide our letter dated 11th May'2004 regarding the land price and its implications on our financial projections and we can only reiterate the same. However, we accept the price of Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rupees one lac thirty thousand) per katha with a prayer to the Government to consider our earlier representations. (3) Since the price of land now is based on the Government land valuation of the area and not at a concessional rate the amount of Earnest Money should be Rs. 4.57 crores at the rate of Rs. 1.30 Lakhs per katha for 70 bighas, 1 katha and 10 lechas. In view of this additional financial burden we like to put forward out humble prayer to reconsider the amount of Earnest Money Under reference to a maximum of 25% of value of land amounting to Rs. 1.14 crores. Further, the purpose of the land use will be open in absolute terms as it is intended to create Retail and Commercial, Entertainment and Institutional facilities over and above the Residential units to be built as oper requirements specified by NGS to house the personnel for the Games. The Earnest Money is to be released on completion of the Games Village within the stipulated time frame as mentioned in the agreement. (4) All the discussions have taken place on the basis of the project being finished by 31st October-05 and being made available to the NGS for a period of one month. However, to suit the requirements of practical conveniences so far as the National Games is concerned, we agree to a maximum period of two (2) months beyond which certain charges will be levied on terms mutually agreed upon. (5) Accepted. (6) It may please be noted that M/s. Sembcorp, who are the Construction Managers to the project can only submit the milestone with respect to the completion of the Games Village. (5) Accepted. (6) It may please be noted that M/s. Sembcorp, who are the Construction Managers to the project can only submit the milestone with respect to the completion of the Games Village. The milestone will be prepared in consultation with M/s. Sembcorp once the agreement is signed and conveyance formalities of land has been completed. The same will then be made available and finalized in consultation with NGS. (7) In view of the fact that we are being made to furnish Earnest Money, the Government is requested to reconsider deletion of liquidated damages. In case it is not possible, we again take this opportunity to propose a rate of Rs. 1.00 lakh per day instead of Rs. 3.00 lakhs per day up to a maximum of 25% of value of land from the stipulated date of handing over of the Games Village to NGS in the event of any delay. (8) We recommend that this clause should be made part of the main agreement. May we take this opportunity of stating again that the agreement signing and conveyance of land formalities be completed at the earliest to enable us to commence work. We have already lost very valuable time and our Singapore Consortium associates are getting genuinely worried about the time frame in the interest of the project. We look forward to hearing from you very shortly. Thanking you Yours faithfully For Pragati Growth and Development 16. The Respondent No. 2 by its letter dated 10.6.2004 which according to the Petitioners was a belated one having regard to the urgency in the project, confirmed the work allotment in favour of the Petitioner company. However, the price of the land, was shown to be fixed at Rs. 5 lacs per katha in respect of which the Petitioners has raised a grievance in this writ proceeding while agreeing to all other conditions laid down in the said letter dated 10.6.2004 which included completion of the project in all respect and to handover the apartments to the Respondent No. 2 by 1st October, 2005 for a period of two months or so. The liquidated damages for delay in achieving the milestone was fixed at Rs. 3 lakhs per day. By the said letter the Petitioners were directed to intimate their views and confirmation of acceptance by 11.6.2004 i.e. on the following day of the issuance of the letter. 17. The liquidated damages for delay in achieving the milestone was fixed at Rs. 3 lakhs per day. By the said letter the Petitioners were directed to intimate their views and confirmation of acceptance by 11.6.2004 i.e. on the following day of the issuance of the letter. 17. Only grievance raised by the Petitioners while agreeing to all other conditions is that the price of the land having been increased from Rs. 71,000/- to Rs. 1,30,000/- as per recommendation of the Core Committee and the Petitioners having acted on that basis, the Respondents could not have arbitrarily raised the same to Rs. 5,00,000/- and then to put pressure on the Petitioners to intimate their acceptance or otherwise within 24 hours after the Respondents themselves considerably delayed the matter. The Petitioners have alleged malafide and colourable exercise of power on the part of the Respondents. Their contention is that such an exhorbitant price of the land and that too making a deviation from their own proposal based on which the Petitioners altered their position, has been resorted to by the Respondents with a view to see the ouster of the Petitioners from the fray so as to accommodate another prospective bidder seemingly awaiting undue favour of the Respondents. The Petitioners have also annexed the approved agreement, which was to be executed with them incorporating the clause relating to the price of the land as Rs. 71,000/-. 18. By a communication, dated 15.6.2004, the Respondent No. 2 asked the Petitioners to intimate their decision relating to the offer made by letter dated 10.6.2004 and the decision was directed to be communicated on the same date with the stipulation that no further time would be extended beyond 15.6.2004. On 15.6.2004 the Petitioners requested the Respondent No. 2 to refer to its earlier commitments and also to the recommendation of the Core Committee relating to the fixation of the price of the land at Rs. 1,30,000/-. They contended that the enhancement of the price to Rs. 5,00,000/- which is almost four times, was without any basis and was so fixed unilaterally without assigning any reasons. The Petitioners also requested to re-consider the matter as to whether the same constitutes a just and equitable mode of conducting business on behalf of the State Government in the light of the circumstances surrounding the project. 19. 5,00,000/- which is almost four times, was without any basis and was so fixed unilaterally without assigning any reasons. The Petitioners also requested to re-consider the matter as to whether the same constitutes a just and equitable mode of conducting business on behalf of the State Government in the light of the circumstances surrounding the project. 19. The Petitioners having not received any response from the Respondents have approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition making a challenge primarily to the aforesaid re-fixation of price of the land which according to them is arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of the principles of natural justice and foreign to the known principles of administrative fairplay and legitimate expectation. Accordingly to the Petitioners such a course of action on the part of the Respondents is opposed to the principles involving promissory estoppel. 20. The Respondents have entered appearance in the case by filing an affidavit-in-opposition. In the affidavit, the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter has not been controverted. They have admitted in their affidavit that for the purpose of the project i.e. the construction of the National Games Village a decision has been taken by the Government that there shall be no investment from the Government for construction of the same and for that purpose the Government initiated a process of inviting "Expression of Interest" (EOI) from the interested builders by All India News Paper advertisement in the month of October, 2003. Altogether 9 builders expressed their interest by submitting their terms and conditions. The Respondent No. 2 examined the credentials of those bidders and found none of they are suitable. The core issue relating to the price of the land has been dealt with in the affidavit in the following manner. The value of the land under acquisition was fixed at Rs. 71,000/- per Katha in view of the fact that the same was low lying requiring lot of earth filling. Such land has been entrusted to M/s. L and T Ltd. for construction of the main Sports Complex. Compared to such a position of the said land, the land in question over which the National Games Village is proposed to be constructed is highly developed and is at a distance of 2 Kms from Sarusajai area in which the main Sports Complex is being constructed. Compared to such a position of the said land, the land in question over which the National Games Village is proposed to be constructed is highly developed and is at a distance of 2 Kms from Sarusajai area in which the main Sports Complex is being constructed. There are boundary walls in two sides of the land and two motorable approach roads are also there and thus the land in question cannot be compared with the land at Sanisqjai for which the value has been fixed at Rs. 71,000/-. As regards the recommendation of the Core Committee relating to the price of the land, the stand in the affidavit is that the Core Committee only recommended the minimum price of the land which cannot be said to be the final price. The Government did not accept the recommendation of the Core Committee relating to the price of the land and upon formation of another committee, the Government fixed the price at Rs. 5,00,000/- examining all pros and cons. The Cabinet has also approved the price and thus there is no infirmity in fixing the price. The delay towards initiation and completion of the project has been attributed to the Petitioners. 21. An affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the Petitioners to the said affidavit-in-opposition, reiterating the stand in the writ petition. As regards the committee purported constituted by the Chief Secretary of the State which fixed the price at Rs. 5,00,000/-, it is the stand in the reply affidavit that such a committee was never constituted with the approval of the Government as was done in the case of the Core Committee, but was constituted solely at the behest of the Chief Secretary of the State. The Petitioners have contended in the reply affidavit that no reasons having been assigned towards arbitrary hike in the price of the land, same is unsustainable. The main thrust in the reply affidavit is that when the Petitioners have taken up the project and are almost at the verge of commencement of the same, the Respondents cannot resile back from their promise by way of arbitrary hike in the price of the land which eventually would see the ouster of the Petitioners and frustrate the whole project leading to non-holding of the National Games itself It is the stand in the affidavit-in-reply that two of the earlier contenders viz. Housefed and Meghomallar whose offers were rejected by the Respondents once again made their appearance showing the price of the land at an exhorbitant rate so as to frustrate the case of the Petitioners. It is the case of the Petitioners that the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary could not have taken into consideration the price indicated by the said two parties at a later point of time after rejection of their offer and at a time when the deal was struck with the Petitioners. The Petitioners have also highlighted as to how the offers made by the said two parties are much dis-advantageous to the Respondents than that of the Petitioners, more particularly, their failure to make any offer to the price of the land and confining the same to the allotment of certain floor areas to the Respondents in lieu of the price of the land. 22. It is the further stand in the reply affidavit that the methodology adopted towards fixation of the price by the Chief Secretary is opposed to the known principle of fixation of price. Referring to the recommendation of the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary, the Petitioners have contended that even in this report it has been admitted that out of the total area of the land, about 22 Bighas are low lying requiring earth filling varying from 1 Mtr. to 1.5 Mtr. The Petitioners have further projected as to how pursuant to the offer ma by the Respondents indicating the price of the land to be Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha, they have altered their position entering into agreement etc. with the aforesaid two Singapore Government linked companies and appointing Architects, consultants to prepare project reports, who in fact have prepared the project: The Petitioners have also annexed documents relating to land revenue showing the value of the adjacent land as Rs. 50,000/- per katha. 23. I have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. I. Choudhury, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Jr. Government Advocate for the Respondents. Mr. Choudhury, highlighting the aforesaid factual position primarily argued on the principles relating to legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel. 50,000/- per katha. 23. I have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. I. Choudhury, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Jr. Government Advocate for the Respondents. Mr. Choudhury, highlighting the aforesaid factual position primarily argued on the principles relating to legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel. He emphasized that the impugned action on the part of the Respondents smacks of malafide and colourable exercise of power leading to only one conclusion that the Respondents for their own vested interest defying the interest of the State and for that matter the public in general have adopted such an approach. Questioning the competence and jurisdiction of the Chief Secretary to constitute another committee after finalisation of the issues by the Core Committee constituted for the purposes by the Government of Assam, Mr. Choudhury submitted that such a committee cannot override the recommendations made by the Core Committee. Refining to the provisions of Section 18 and 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, Mr. Choudhury argued that the price of the land was correctly fixed and the same could not have been arbitrarily enhanced on the basis of a procedure unknown to known principles. He also highlighted as to how the Petitioners have altered their position acting on the assurance and promise made by the Respondents and their eventual liability, which they are likely to face in the event of failure of the deal. Elaborately projecting the principles relating to promissory estoppel, he also placed reliance on the following decisions: (1979) 2 SCC 409 (Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills v. State of U.P.) (1988) 3 SCC 751 (Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. Special Land Acquisition Officer) (1994) 2 SCC 133 (Printers House Pvt. Ltd. v. Mst. Saiyadan) (1997) 3 SCC 398 ( Shrijee Sales Corporation v. Union of India) 136 STC 35 (SC) (State of Punjab v. Nestle India Ltd.) 1999 (2) GLT 292 : (2000) 1 GLR 41 (Ansal Properties v. State of Assam) 24. Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Jr. Government Advocate, on the other hand strenuously argued justifying the stand of the Respondents. He submitted that the fixation of the price of the land by the Core Committee was only tentative and in any case was only a recommendation. Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Jr. Government Advocate, on the other hand strenuously argued justifying the stand of the Respondents. He submitted that the fixation of the price of the land by the Core Committee was only tentative and in any case was only a recommendation. The final authority being the State Government, it was within its competence and jurisdiction to make a correct assessment of the value of the land and to fix the price on that basis. He submitted that there is nothing wrong in fixing the price of the land at Rs. 5,00,000/- per katha having regard to the fact that the land is a considerably developed one compared to the land on which the main Sports Complex is being constructed. He submitted that the recommendation made by the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary having been accepted by the Cabinet, the issue relating to bypassing the recommendation of the Core Committee by the Chief Secretary is a nonentity. He submitted that there being no work order or agreement in favour of the Petitioners, the principles involving promissory estoppel are misplaced. He placed reliance on two decisions of the Apex Court as reported in AIR 2002 SC 322 (Sarma Transport v. Govt. of A.P.) and AIR 1999 SC 2302 (State of Rajasthan v. Mahaveer Oil Industries) 25. Learned Counsel for the parties emphasized the need for early disposal of the matter. They also emphasized the inportance of the event and expressed their anxiety because of the situation created by the present stalemate. Having regard to the urgency and inportance of the matter and keeping in mind the fact that the National Games Village will have to be made ready latest by 1st October, 2005, this Court made an endeavor to have an amicable settlement of the matter. With that purpose in mind, the representative of the Respondent No. 2 i.e. the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports and Youth Welfare who is also the Secretary General of the National Games Secretariat was requested to be present in the Court. The Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue Department and the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) were also requested to be present in the Court. They appeared in the Court and made their submissions. 26. The Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue Department and the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) were also requested to be present in the Court. They appeared in the Court and made their submissions. 26. While all of them emphasised the need for an early settlement of the matter paving the way for holding of the prestigious National Games, but could not throw any light as to what should be the actual price of the land in question. However, they expressed their opinion that the price of the land per Katha would not be less than Rs. 3,00,000/-. On asking the learned Counsel for the Petitioners as to whether they are agreeable to strike a deal at that price, he submitted upon instruction from the Petitioners that they are not agreeable to such a hike of the price but are agreeable to a upward variation by about 10% or so to the earlier price of Rs. 1,30,000/-. learned Counsel for the Petitioners even had gone to the extent of making a submission that if any party agrees to the same terms and conditions as that of the Petitioners and also agrees to complete the project taking the land at the price of Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha, the Petitioners would be glad to opt out from the fray. 27. On being asked, the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) submitted that certain land acquisition proceedings relating to land adjacent to the land in question are going on in respect of which Rs. 71,000/- has been made the base price per Katha. He agreed that in the event of materialization of the price of the land at Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha, same will have an affect in those proceedings with the possibility of hike in price as payment of compensation. On a request made by the Court, the Deputy Commissioner produced two sale deeds purportedly pertaining to two plots of land situated somewhere nearer to the land in question. The value of the land per Katha in the sale deeds has been shown as Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 4,00,000/- respectively. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and for that matter even the learned Jr. Government Advocate submitted that the land in question in the said two sale deeds are nowhere nearer to the land in question and fell in another category having no nexus with the category in which the land in question falls. 28. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 4,00,000/- respectively. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and for that matter even the learned Jr. Government Advocate submitted that the land in question in the said two sale deeds are nowhere nearer to the land in question and fell in another category having no nexus with the category in which the land in question falls. 28. It is in the aforesaid backdrop, this Court is entrusted with the task of answering the issue as to whether having regard to the understanding arrived at by and between the parties including the price of the land, it was permissible on the part of the Respondents to enhance the price in the manner and method in which the same was done. The issue will have to be answered taking into account the practical reality, importance of the event, other terms and conditions of the offer made and accepted by the Petitioners, paucity of time towards completion of the project, the fact that the entire land is being purchased by the Petitioners in a lot on payment of cash without any reservation etc. learned Counsel for the parties and the representatives of the State agreed that it may not be feasible and practicable to strike another deal so as to conplete the project within the stipulated time and that a situation may arise in the event of failure of the present deal in which holding of the National Games itself may have to be abandoned. 29. After the initial failure to strike any deal with any one of the 9 contenders who had Responded to the "Expression of Interest", it was the Petitioner company who has come forwarded to complete the project within the stipulated period. Out of the 9 contenders, two contenders were Housefed and Meghomallar. During the deliberations and meetings held between the Respondents and Petitioners towards finalisation of the modalities for completion of the project, the Petitioners were intimated that the price of the land proposed to be transferred to SPV for execution of the project would be Rs. 71,000/ - per Katha. Such a price was fixed on the basis of cost of the acquisition of land around the area in which the land is situated. This is precisely the reason as to how the said price came to be incorporated in the draft agreement mentioned above. 71,000/ - per Katha. Such a price was fixed on the basis of cost of the acquisition of land around the area in which the land is situated. This is precisely the reason as to how the said price came to be incorporated in the draft agreement mentioned above. However, as per the recommendations of the Core Committee, the price was enhanced to Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha to which also the Petitioners have agreed. It is on that basis they entered into consortium agreements with the aforesaid Singapore Government Linked companies. They also engaged Architects and consultants to prepare the project report who in turn have prepared the same The Respondent No. 2 by its communication, dated 17.5.2004 intimated the Petitioners about the recommendation of the Core Committee, which included the price of the land. The contents of the said communication dated 17.5.2004 have been quoted above (paragraph-14). 30. By the said communication, while forwarding the recommendations of the Core Committee, the Petitioners were asked to intimate their views on the same. The Petitioners, in turn by its communication, dated 17.5.2004 reacted to the said proposal. The contents of their said letter have also been quoted above (paragraph-15). 31. There is no dispute relating to the other terms which have been agreed to by the Petitioners. This position was also made known during the course of hearing. The only dispute is in respect of the hike in the price of the land from Rs. 1,30,000/- to Rs. 5,00,000/-. After acceptance of the offer made by the Respondent No. 2, by the Petitioners by their aforesaid communication dated 17.5.2004 in which they also emphasized the need for observing the required formalities towards commencement of the work and the anxiety expressed by the Singapore Consortium Associates about the time frame in which the project is required to be completed. Nothing was communicated to them and it was only on 10.6.2004 the Respondents conveyed the decision to entrust the construction of the work on the terms and conditions mentioned in the letter. By the said communication the price of the land was fixed at Rs. 5,00,000/- apart from other-conditions stipulated therein. The Petitioners were asked to intimate their views and confirmation on the following day itself i.e. on 11.6.2004. The Petitioners reacted to the said letter by their communications dated 10.6.2004 and 15.6.2004. By the said communication the price of the land was fixed at Rs. 5,00,000/- apart from other-conditions stipulated therein. The Petitioners were asked to intimate their views and confirmation on the following day itself i.e. on 11.6.2004. The Petitioners reacted to the said letter by their communications dated 10.6.2004 and 15.6.2004. By the first communication dated 10.6.2004, the Petitioners prayed for few more days time to have delibirations on the terms and conditions with their Singapore based associates and by second communication dated 15.6.2004 intimated as to how the enhancement of the price of the land to Rs. 5,00,000/- from Rs. 1,30,000/- was unilateral and without assigning any reason. They also requested to consider as to whether such hike in price constitutes a just and equitable mode of conducting business on behalf of the Government of Assam in the light of the circumstances surrounding the project. In between, the Respondent No. 2 issued letter dated 15.6.2004 to the Petitioners asking them to intimate their decision by the end of the same day with the stipulation that no further time would be extended beyond 15.6.2004. 32. The minutes of discussion held in the Office Chamber of the Chief Secretary, Assam on 31.5.2004 on the basis of which the impugned decision relating to hike in the price of the land was communicated to the Petitioner has been annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition. Relevant clauses of the minutes of discussion are quoted below: 3. It is seen from letter dated 17.5.2004 addressed to M/s. Pragati by the Commissioner and Secretary, Sports and Secretary General NGS (File No. NGS/infra/GB/I/03/Pt.-I) that the construction of the Games Village should be completed to make a provision for 10,000 persons in 800 units and hand over the apartments to NGS by October, 2005 for a period of two months or so. It is further stated that M/s. Pragati will make available the accommodation for 10,000 persons free of cost for a period of two months. M/s. Pragati has informed the Sports Department and NGS Secretariat by letter dated 17.05.2004(81.21-23/c of file ibid) that by 31st October, 2005 finished project will be made available to the NGS for a period of one month, which may extend up to two months, free of charges. However, the number of units that they will build up nor the total plinth area that will be constructed have been indicated. However, the number of units that they will build up nor the total plinth area that will be constructed have been indicated. In the draft agreement vetted by Advocate General on 2.5.04, it has been provided that the National Games Village Project comprising not less then 800 apartments and other structures, for accommodating approximately 10,000 persons in reasonable comfort and adequate open space for setting up temporary structures for their dining and related facilities and other relevant requirement for self-contained dormitory will be made ready latest by 15th October, 2005 for occupation for a period of approximately two months during the National Games to be held in November, 2005 (file ibid). 4. M/s. Pragati has agreed to make a security deposit of Rs. 4.5 crores in the form of bank guarantee, which AG has insisted to be Rs. 5 crores to be released after completion of the project to the satisfaction of the Games Secretariat. 5. Vide the same letter dated 17.5.04, M/s. Pragati has agreed to pay damage @ Rs. 1 lakh per day upto 25% of the value of the land from the stipulated date of the handing over of the Games Village to NGS in the vent of any delay. The AG has however insisted at Rs. 3 lakhs per day and that the land will be released only after the objective is achieved. 6. The Committee also noted that M/s. Pragati would grt certain advantage out of the existing boundary walls as mentioned in the report of the Site Verification Committee dated 31.5.2004. 7. The Committee also considered the report of the Core Committee headed by Additional Chief Secretary (Shri C. Babu Rajiv) which fixed floor price of the identified land @ Rs. 1.30 lakh per katha. The committee also noted the report of the DC Kamrup (M) vide letter dated 5.5.2004 (file ibid) where it has also been pointed out that the value of the land along the National Highway have increased manifold during last one year due to implementation of the east West Corridor Express Highway Project. 8. The Committee considered the price of land offered by Housefed at a rate of Rs. 4.00 lakh per katha vide letter dated 14.5.2004 (Sl. 123/c at file No. NGS/Infra/GB/1/2003). It also noted the land value worked out on the basis of the offer of Meghomallar based on assumed floor area of 1200 sq. ft. @ Rs. 8. The Committee considered the price of land offered by Housefed at a rate of Rs. 4.00 lakh per katha vide letter dated 14.5.2004 (Sl. 123/c at file No. NGS/Infra/GB/1/2003). It also noted the land value worked out on the basis of the offer of Meghomallar based on assumed floor area of 1200 sq. ft. @ Rs. 7,77,600/- per katha. 9. The Committee considered the realistic market price of land which could be fixed as suggested by the Chief Secretary in file No. NGS/Infra/GB/03/Pt.I at Rs. S.O Olakh to Rs. 5.55 lakh per katha. 10. Taking into consideration the various rates as available, also based on source information about the present running rate in adjacent areas and after a detailed deliberation, the committee felt that since the compact plot of land is to be handed over to only one agency for building up the Games village, it would be fair and reasonable to fix the price at Rs. 5 lakh pa katha, although if the land is to be sold to various individuals/parties after portioning into several plots, the value that could accrued would be higher in ail likelihood. But as the purpose of the proposed handing over of the departmental land is for building up the Games village only and that too within a specified time frame, the price of Rs. 5 lakh per katha was recommended. Thus, the total price of land for 3511/2 kathas (=70B-01K-10L) would come to Rs. 1757.50lakh. 33. As contained in Clause 6 of the minutes of discussion, the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary took into consideration the site inspection report prepared by the Site Verification Committee on 31.5.2004. The Site Inspection Report, while emphasizing the importance of the land also indicated that a portion of the land from the front side is little low lying (about 22 Bigha) requiring earth filling varying from 1 to 1.5 Mtrs., although the rear portion of the land is solid and can be used for residential and other purposes. The report also speaks of the boundary walls on two sides of the land with broken portions. It further speaks of the perimeter wall fencing required to be constructed by the Petitioners the cost of which will be on the basis of the cost of the land. However, the report pointed out that this aspect of the matter is not clear. It further speaks of the perimeter wall fencing required to be constructed by the Petitioners the cost of which will be on the basis of the cost of the land. However, the report pointed out that this aspect of the matter is not clear. The report also suggested relief by way of rebate to the Petitioners having regard to the urgency of the project. Finally it suggested that the Commissioner and Secretary, Sports may be advised to submit a draft cabinet memorandum for a decision, if any for further concession, otherwise to fix the total price of the land at Rs. 1600 lakh after the relief of Rs. 52.5 lakh mentioned in the report. 34. Two things emerged from the aforesaid narration of fact viz. (1) fixation of the original price of Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha as suggested by the Core Committee constituted for the purpose which took into consideration the recently fixed land valuation by the Revenue Department of the Government of Assam and (2) the land valuation worked out by the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary of the State. In this connection the learned State counsel has produced the records. I have gone through the records. The following revelation are made from the records: Revelation from the Records (i) Out of the 9 contenders who had responded to the "Expression of Interest", two contenders were M/s. Meghmallar and Housefed. All the 9 contenders were not found suitable for the job. However, when the matter proceeded with the Petitioners much, M/s. Meghmallar after a lapse of about 7 months reappeared in the scene with a renewed terms and conditions by their letter dated 17.5.2004. However, they did not mention about the time frame to complete the project. They also did not spell out any amount for purchase or transfer of land. They simply calculated the value of the land after assessing or adding the value of the built up area. There was no offer for purchase or transfer of land. Similarly the Housefed also renewed their office-with a proposal to transfer 45 Bighas of land free of cost as supportive condition for taking up the construction. It also put a condition to increase the borrowing power for obtaining the HUDCO loan. However, both the parties who did not submit any documents to prove their credentials mentioned the land value as Rs. 7,77,600/-and Rs. It also put a condition to increase the borrowing power for obtaining the HUDCO loan. However, both the parties who did not submit any documents to prove their credentials mentioned the land value as Rs. 7,77,600/-and Rs. 4,00,000/- respectively The Meghmallar calculated the cost of land per Katha on the basis of built up area calculation. As against such indication of price of the land, none of the parties could fulfill the other conditions. The aforesaid revelations have been made by the Secretary General, National Games Secretariat in his note dated 22.5.2004 which was put up to the Chief Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary. (ii) The Government of Assam in the Department of Sports and Youth Welfare constituted the Core Committee by their notification No. 159/2002/Pt-II/67 dated 6.5.2004 to look into different aspects regarding construction of the Games Village, one of which was to assess the market value of the land for the propose of transfer of the land in consultation with the Commissioner, Revenue Department and Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M). The Petitioners could only annex (Annexure-XIII) which is the communication forwarding some of the observations of the Core Committee which indicated the price of the land to be Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha. However, the full text of the Core Committee report as available in the file indicates its detailed examination of various aspects of the matter including the consideration of the status, business profile and past experience of the Petitioners. As regards the assessment of the value of the land, the committee made the following observations: Assessment of the value of land The Govt. in the Water Resources Department and NGS is proposing to transfer approximately seventy bighas of land under No. 2 Basistha Beltola Mouza to M/s. Pragati for construction of the Games Village against payment of appropriate compensation. A note issued by Minister of Sports to the Hon'ble Chief Minister in this regard is at Annexure-VI. Based on the above, the NGS has written to Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) vide letter No. NGS/INFRA/GV/1/2003/70 dated 17 March 2004 to take necessary steps for handing over the concerned land to M/s. Pragati. A meeting was held in the office chamber of the Minister of Sports to discuss the matter regarding allotment of land on the 2nd April 2004, the minutes of which is placed at VII. In the meeting Secretary, Water Resource Dept. A meeting was held in the office chamber of the Minister of Sports to discuss the matter regarding allotment of land on the 2nd April 2004, the minutes of which is placed at VII. In the meeting Secretary, Water Resource Dept. has agreed to make available land measuring approximate 70 bighas subject to certain terms and conditions. Subsequently, Secretary Water Resource Dept. has written to Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) to inform the Department the value of the land proposed to be transferred vide his letter dated 19/04/04. The letter from DC, Kamrup (M) dated 5th May 2004 addressed to the Revenue Department m this regard is at Annexure-VII. Vide the above latter, the DC, Kamrup (M) has informed that the cost of land based on recent land acquisition cases in the neighbouring Sarusajai and Saokuchi villages (inclusive of additional compensation at the rate of 42%) is Rupees 71,000/- (Rupees Seventy One Thousand) only per katha. However, he has also informed that Govt. of Assam has fixed valuation of land within Municipal Corporation area wise for transfer of land vide Revenue Department's circular number RRG 3/2003/13 dated 05/12/03. As per this the value of the land in the Revenue village Basistha has been fixed at Rs. 1.30 lakhs per katha. The Deputy Commissioner has also pointed out that the value of land along the National Highway has increased many fold and the Government may consider a field survey to assess the present market value of land. The Committee has discussed at length on the subject of appropriate market value to be fixed for the proposed land. The proposed land is located very close to the National Highway Bye Pass and the value of land in this area is unofficially quoted at various ranges at times as high as Rs. 5.00 lakhs per katha. However, the committee felt that such high prices would be fetched only when sale of small parcels of land are made and unlikely for sale of a large area of 70 bighas. The Committee noted that there is no prescribed procedure to assess the exact market value of land, except the normal practice of averaging the prices recorded in the recently registered sale deeds in the neighbouring areas. The prices are normally under quoted in these cases to escape payment of stamp duty. The Committee noted that there is no prescribed procedure to assess the exact market value of land, except the normal practice of averaging the prices recorded in the recently registered sale deeds in the neighbouring areas. The prices are normally under quoted in these cases to escape payment of stamp duty. A reliable method of estimating the market value would have been to put the land for sale by public tender. In the instant case, the land is proposed to be transferred to M/s. Pragati for a specific purpose and under specific conditions and therefore there is little possibility of putting the land for sale by tender, especially considering the extremely tight time schedule. As M/s. Pragati has accepted to construct the Games Village and make it available to hold the National Games in November 2005. They would have to complete the construction latest by October 2005 in all respects. They are also to make available the accommodation free of cost for the period of two months, i.e. till last week of November 2005. The company has therefore written to the NGS that they are entering into this project without sufficient time to carry out proper market feasibility and hence are open to heavy risks. In view of the above, the company had submitted a letter to NGS seeking transfer of land at nominal price. The Committee felt that in the absence of any other accepted procedure for valuation of land under the present context and considering the fact that the revenue Department has only recently fixed land valuation in the revenue village of Basistha at Rs. 1.30 lakhs per katha and in view of the purpose for which the land is sought to be transfered to M/s. Pragati the State Government would consider the transfer of land to M/s. Pragati at a price not below Rs. 1.30 Lakhs per katha. (iii) A comparative statement relating to various aspects of the Petitioners and M/s. Meghomallar and Housefed is also available in the file, as per which, it is the Petitioner who alone has submitted documents to justify the financial soundness/capabilities. Similarly, as regards the details of associates, it is the Petitioner who alone has submitted the same. As against the offer of Rs. 5 crores as earnest money by the Petitioners, the other two parties have not offered anything. Similarly, as regards the details of associates, it is the Petitioner who alone has submitted the same. As against the offer of Rs. 5 crores as earnest money by the Petitioners, the other two parties have not offered anything. Likewise as against the consent of the Petitioners for liquidated damage for not delivering the Games Village in time at Rs. 3 lakh per day, the other two parties have not offered anything. (iv) The hike in the price of the land from Rs. 1,30,000/- to Rs. 5,00,000,/- has been made primarily on the basis of a note dated 27.5.2004 made by the Chief Secretary, Government of Assam. The relevant portion of the note is quoted below: The DC has pointed out that, the Revenue Department fixed the value of land @ Rs. 1,30,000/ -per Katlia at Basistha village in 2003. DC has also reported that the value of land along the NH way have increased manifold during last one year due to implementation of East West Corridor Express High Way project. He has suggested a field survey to assess the present value of the land before fixing the value of the land for Games Village to be handed over to any party. It is rather surprising that no steps were taken by the WR deptt. or the district Revenue Authority to make a quick survey field survey. Now, the time is running fast and an immediate decision is required to be taken in the interest of the game and the prestige of the State. To my considered opinion, the market value of the land maybe fixed, based on the offer of Housefed @ Rs. 4 lakh per katha, and also keeping in mind the land rate of Meghamallar based on floor area of Rs. 1200 per sq. ft., i.e. about Rs. 7.10 lakh per Katha (refer File No. NGS/Infra/GV/I/2003 already with CM Sectt.) If we take the average of the offers, it comes to Rs. 5.55 lakh per Katha. Alternatively, we may considered 100% escalation on the price of Rs. 1.30 lakh per Katha, i.e., Rs. 2.60 lakh, Rs. 4.00 lakh and Rs. 7.10 lakh as above and take their average. It comes to Rs. 4.47 lakh per Katha. Tlien we have to notionally fix an amount on account of existing structure, walls etc., which may come to a few thousand rupees per Katha. 1.30 lakh per Katha, i.e., Rs. 2.60 lakh, Rs. 4.00 lakh and Rs. 7.10 lakh as above and take their average. It comes to Rs. 4.47 lakh per Katha. Tlien we have to notionally fix an amount on account of existing structure, walls etc., which may come to a few thousand rupees per Katha. Roughly then, we may come to an round figure of Rs. 5.00 lakh per Katha. (v) The Chief Minister of the State gave a note on 29.5.2004 to fix the price in consultation with the concerned Department. Thereafter, the Chief Secretary fixing the land price at Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha again put up the file on 1.6.2004 before the Chief Minister of the State placing on record the recommendation of the committee constituted. The Chief Minister on that basis ordered to place the matter before the Cabinet by his note dated 1.6.2004. Thereafter a Cabinet memorandum was prepared and the same was approved by the Cabinet in its meeting held on 9.6.2004, extract of which is reproduced below: After detailed deliberation, the cabinet approved the proposed land value of Rs. 5.00 lakh per katha. The cabinet also approved the proposal foi granting lump sum rebate of Rs. 1 (one) crore on the total land value for providing a floor area of 10,00,000 sq. ft. by Pragati Growtti and Development Limited to accommodate about 10,000 persons. A further rebate of another Rs. 52.5 lakhs on total land value would be allowed for depositing Earnest Money (Security) of Rs. 5.00 (five) crore for a period of 18 months. The Cabinet expressed concern over slow progress of the various construction activities for hosting the National Games 2005 and desired that for holding the Games as per schedule, all the construction works including the "Games Village" must be completed in all respects well before November 2005. Accordingly, the Cabinet directed that all the works connected with the Games must be taken up and executed on war footing. (vi) The committee constituted by the Chief Secretary considered the letter of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) dated 5.5.2004 observing that the value of the land has considerably increased during the last one year. In the said letter, the Deputy Commissioner indicated the price of the land at Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha. (vi) The committee constituted by the Chief Secretary considered the letter of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) dated 5.5.2004 observing that the value of the land has considerably increased during the last one year. In the said letter, the Deputy Commissioner indicated the price of the land at Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha. The Core Committee estimated the price of the land on the basis of the land valuation fixed by the Revenue Department of the Government of Assam in the Revenue Village of Basistha. The Government of Assam in the Revenue Department re-assessed the value of the land in Guwahati category wise and issued letter No. RRG.3/2003/13 dated 5.12.2003. The land in question has been categorized as 'C' fixing the minimum revised rate at Rs. 1 ,30,000/- per Katha. 35. From the aforesaid revelations made from the records, it will be seen that as against the assignment of the price of the land at Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha by the Core Committee, which was constituted by the State Government for the purpose taking into account the attending circumstances and all relevant factors, the subsequent committee constituted by the Chief Secretary was primarily guided by the aforesaid note of the Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary adopted a strange procedure towards fixation of the price of the land. He took into account the materials of the renewed offers made by two of the rejected contenders unmindful of the other attending circumstances such as non-commitment of the said two contenders about timely completion of the project, non-furnishing of any earnest money, non-furnishing of any documents supporting their credentials etc. He also did not take into account that about 22 Bighas of the land are low lying land requiring earth filling, the offer of the Petitioners to pay the price in cash beforehand and their assurance of timely completion of the project and their undertaking to pay liquidated damage of Rs. 3,00,000/- per day for everyday's delay in completing the project, as against no such offer on the part of the other two contenders. He simply took into account the fixation of price of the land made by the said two parties and doubled the offered price of Rs. 1,30,000/- and thereafter taking the average of the three prices calculated the price of the land to be Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha. He simply took into account the fixation of price of the land made by the said two parties and doubled the offered price of Rs. 1,30,000/- and thereafter taking the average of the three prices calculated the price of the land to be Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha. He did not address himself to the offer already made to the Petitioner indicating the price of the land at Rs. 1,30,000/- per Katha and the change of position by the Petitioners. He also did not take into account the recommendation of the Chief Minister to fix the price in consultation with the concerned department and put up the file once again to the Chief Minister placing on record the report of the committee constituted by himself on the basis of which the Chief Minister recommended for placing the matter before the Cabinet. It is not known as to what for there was necessity to constitute another committee by the Chief Secretary when the Government already constituted the Core Committee for the purpose. The committee constituted by the Chief Secretary simply endorsed the view expressed by the Chief Secretary fixing the price of the land at Rs. 5,00,000/- on the basis of the aforesaid formula. The formula adopted by the Chief Secretary cannot be said to be even akin to the known method of assessing the price of land. 36. It is in the aforesaid background, learned Counsel for the Petitioners placed reliance on the decisions mentioned above. (I) In the case of Motilal Padampat (supra), the Apex Court dealing with the principle relating to promissory estoppel held that the doctrine would apply even where there is no pre-existing legal relationship between the parties, but the promise is intended to create legal relations or affect a legal relationship which will arise in future. (I) In the case of Motilal Padampat (supra), the Apex Court dealing with the principle relating to promissory estoppel held that the doctrine would apply even where there is no pre-existing legal relationship between the parties, but the promise is intended to create legal relations or affect a legal relationship which will arise in future. It was observed that the true principle of promissory estoppel is that where one party by his works or conduct made to the other a clear and unequivocal promise which is intended to create legal relations or affect a legal relationship to arise in the future, knowing and intended that it would be acted upon by the other party to whom the promise is made and it is in fact so acted upon by the other party, the promise would be binding on the party making it and he would not be entitled to go back upon it, if it would be inequitable to allow him to do so having regard to the dealings which have taken place between the parties, and this would be so irrespective of whether there is any pre-existing relationship between the parties or not. The Apex Court also emphasized that the Government is not exempt from Hability to carry out the representation made by it as to its fixture conduct and it cannot on some undefined and undisclosed ground of necessity or expediency fail to carry out the promise solemnly made by it, nor claim to be the judge of its own obligation to the citizen on an ex parte appraisement of the circumstances in which the obligation has arisen. Where the Government makes a promise knowing or intending that it would be acted on by the promisee and, in fact, the promisee, acting in reliance on it, alters his position, the Government would be held bound by the promise and the promise would be enforceable against the Government at the instance of the promisee, notwithstanding that there is no consideration for the promise and the promise is not recorded in the form of normal contact as required by Article 299 of the Constitution. The Apex Court observed. The Apex Court observed. If the Government wants to resist the liability, it will have to disclose to the Court what are the facts and circumstances on account of which the Government claims to be exempt from the liability and it would be for the Court to decide whether those facts and circumstances are such as to render it inequitable to enforce the liability against the Government. Mere claim of change of policy would not be sufficient to ex-onerate the Government from the liability: The Government would have to show what precisely is the changed policy and also its reason and justification so that the Court can judge for itself which way the public interest lies and what the equity of the case demands. It is only if the court is satisfied, on proper and adequate material placed by the Government, that overriding public interest requires that the Government should not be held bound by the promise but should be free to act unfettered by it, that the Court would refuse to enforce the promise against the Government. The Court would not act on the mere ipse dixit of the Government, for it is the Court which has to decide and not the Government whether the Government should beheld exempt from liability. This is the essence of the rule of law. The burden would be upon the Government to show that the public interest in the Government acting otherwise than in accordance with the promise is so overwhelming that it would be inequitable to hold the Government bound by the promise and the Court will insist on a highly rigorous standard of prove in the discharge of this burden. But even where there is no such overriding public interest, it may still be competent to the Government to resile from the promise "on giving reasonable notice, which need not be formal notice, giving the promisee a reasonable opportunity of resuming his position" provided of course it is possible for the promisee to restore status quo ante. If, however, the promisee cannot resume his position, the promise would become final and irrevocable. (II) In the case of Shrijee Sales Corporation (Supra) the Apex Court dealing with the doctrine of the promissory estoppel once again emphasized that the same is applicable against the Government. If, however, the promisee cannot resume his position, the promise would become final and irrevocable. (II) In the case of Shrijee Sales Corporation (Supra) the Apex Court dealing with the doctrine of the promissory estoppel once again emphasized that the same is applicable against the Government. But the Court can refuse to enforce the promise against the Government if it could be shown that the overriding public interest demands the same. Referring to the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court in Motilal Padanpat case and upon an analysis of the same the Apex Court held that two propositions follow from the analysis viz. (1) The determination of applicability of promissory estoppel against public authority/government hinges upon balance of equity or "public interest"; (2) It is the Court which has to determine whether the Government should be held exempt from the liability "promise" or "representation". The Apex Court also emphasized the requirement of issuance of notice to the promisee giving a reasonable opportunity of resuming his position. (III) The aforesaid principles relating promissory estoppel have been reiterated and reaffirmed in the case of Nestle India Ltd. (supra). (IV) The other two decisions in Chimanlal Hargovinddas and Printers House Pvt. Ltd. (supra) were pressed into service in reference to the provisions of Section 18 and 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 relating to valuation of land for compensation and the principles to be kept in mind in determining the value. The best evidence for determining the market value of the acquired land could be an authentic transaction of sale relating to the very acquired land or a portion thereof or any other land which could be favourably compared with the acquired land. The Apex Court emphasized on the comparable sales method of valuation of land in preference to other recognized methods of valuation of land, such as capitalization of net income method or expert opinion method. (V) In the case of Mahaveer Oil Industries (supra), the Apex Court while recognizing that public interest requires that the State be held bound by the promise held out by it, but the same does not preclude the State from withdrawing the benefit prospectively, if public interest so requires. Thus the whole emphasis was on public interest which will prevail over any promissory estoppel. Thus the whole emphasis was on public interest which will prevail over any promissory estoppel. Similarly in the case of Sharma Transport (supra) withdrawal of concessional rate of tax held to be not assailable on ground of promissory estoppel. 37. In the aforesaid case of Mahaveer Oil Industries (supra) the Apex Court after noticing the adverse affect of the Incentive Scheme affecting the existing units in the State resulting in the closure of the old units held that such kind of a situation could never be the intention of the Incentive Scheme. The decision taken by the Government, in such a situation, to withdraw the benefit of the scheme was held to be in public interest. It was on that score the Apex Court held that withdrawal of the benefit couldn't be faulted. Similarly in the case of Sharma Transport (supra), withdrawal of the benefit of concessional rate of tax was held to be not arbitrary and assailable on ground of promissory estoppel. In the fact situation of that case, the Apex Court noticed that the operators of tourist buses in the State of Andhra Pradesh are required to pay the same tax as those registered in other States. Therefore, it was held that there cannot be any question of irrationality. It was under such circumstances the Apex Court emphasized the settled law that the promissory estoppel cannot be used compelling the Government or a public authority to carry out a representation or promised which is prohibited by law or which was devoid of the authority or power of the officer of the Government or the public authority to make. It recognized that the doctrine of promissory estoppel being an equitable doctrine, it must yield place to the equity, if larger public interest so requires, and if it can be shown by the Government or public authority for having regard to the facts as they have transpired that it would be inequitable to hold the Government or public authority to the promise or representation made by it. 38. In the instant case, the aforesaid narration of fact would go to show that a promise was made to the Petitioners, although no final deal was struck. During the course of discussion and deliberations, the price of the land was held out to be Rs. 71,000/- per Katha. 38. In the instant case, the aforesaid narration of fact would go to show that a promise was made to the Petitioners, although no final deal was struck. During the course of discussion and deliberations, the price of the land was held out to be Rs. 71,000/- per Katha. However, consequent upon the recommendation of the Core Committee same was held out to be Rs. 1,30,000/. Acting on that basis, the Petitioners substantially altered their positions by entering into an agreement etc. with the two Singapore Government linked companies. They also appointed Architects and Consultants to prepare project report who in turn prepared the same. The deal was almost at the final stage when the Petitioners responded to the offer made by the Respondents after the recommendation of the Core Committee. The Petitioners also emphasized the need for early observance of the formalities so as to initiate and complete the project in time. However, after a considerable delay in the context in which the project is required to be completed within a time frame, the Respondents and for that matter the Government of Assam communicated to the Petitioners the impugned decisions relating to fixation of price of the land raising the same from Rs. 1,30,000/- to Rs. 5,00,000/- per Katha. The Petitioners were not put to any kind of notice before taking the decision relating to hike in price of the land. It was an unilateral decision and thus the Petitioners have been put to a disadvantageous position who in the meantime have altered their position. It is in this kind of a situation, the doctrine of promissory estoppel has been pressed into service placing reliance on the aforesaid decisions. Having regard to the attending facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the considered opinion that the said doctrine is applicable in the instant case in favour of the Petitioners and thus the said decisions fully support the case of the Petitioners. 39. The doctrine of promissory estoppel, has been evolved by the Court, on the principles of equity, to avoid injustice. It is neither in the realm of contract nor the realm of estoppel. Its object is to interpose equity shorn of its form to mitigate the rigour of strict law. 39. The doctrine of promissory estoppel, has been evolved by the Court, on the principles of equity, to avoid injustice. It is neither in the realm of contract nor the realm of estoppel. Its object is to interpose equity shorn of its form to mitigate the rigour of strict law. In Union of India v. Anglo Afghan Agencies as reported AIR 1968 SC 718 it was inter alia observed as follows: We are unable to accede to the contention that the executive necessity releases the Government from honouring its solemn promises relying on which citizens have acted to their detriment. Under our constitutional set-up, no person may be deprived of his right or liberty except in due course of and by authority of law: if a member of the executive seeks to deprive a citizen of his right or liberty otherwise than in exercise of power derived from the law common or statute the courts will be competent to, arid indeed would be bound to, protect the rights of the aggrieved citizens. It was further held in its summing up thus: 23. Under our jurisprudence the Government is not exempt from liability to carry out the representation made by it as to its future conduct and it cannot on some undefined and undisclosed ground of necessary or expediently fail to carry out the promise solemnly made by it, nor claim to be the Judge of its own obligation to the citizen on an ex parte appraisement of the circumstances in which the obligation has arisen. 40. It is on record that in respect of the land adjacent to the land in question, there are acquisition proceedings, in which the value of the land per Katha has been shown to be Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 71,000/-. Thus in the event of raising the price of the land in question as high as Rs. 5,00,000,- per Katha, same will also have an affect in those proceedings with the possibility of the liability to fix the compensation at Rs. 5,00,000/- or even more. Thus while trying to gain, the Government will be looser in respect of those land relating to which acquisition proceedings are on and the proceedings which might arise in fixture. The Core Committee which was constituted to examine various aspect of the matter including the value of the land, made recommendations fixing the price of the land as Rs. 1,30,000/-. Thus while trying to gain, the Government will be looser in respect of those land relating to which acquisition proceedings are on and the proceedings which might arise in fixture. The Core Committee which was constituted to examine various aspect of the matter including the value of the land, made recommendations fixing the price of the land as Rs. 1,30,000/-. The Petitioners were duly intimated about the recommendation of the Core Committee and they also responded to the same. However, when the matter rested thus, the Chief Secretary adopted the formula of taking the average of three prices viz. the prices shown by two rejected contenders i.e. Housefed and Meghomallar and double the price of Rs. 1,30,000/-. 41. These two parties, as per the revelation from the records and as discussed above do not conform to the minimum requirements of credentials for completion of the project and such indication of price by them was much after rejection of their offer by way of renewed offers at a time when much progress was made relating to entrustment of the job to the Petitioners. The Chief Secretary only took into consideration the value of the land as shown them without addressing himself to the other attending circumstances such as not conforming to the other requirements by the said two parties including non-furnishing of any security money and payment of the land price in cash as agreed by the Petitioners. No reason has been assigned for doubling the price of Rs. 1,30,000/- to Rs. 2,60,000/-. He adopted such a procedure on ground of paucity of time. The Chief Minister of the State, however, while reacting to the recommendation endorse a note to fix the price in consultation with the concerned Department which admittedly is the Revenue Department of the State. However, instead of doing that, the report of the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary was placed before the Chief Minister who in turn directed to place the matter before the Cabinet. The records do not reveal any deliberations made by the Cabinet. It simply endorsed the proposal including the price of the land. 42. The Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) in his aforementioned communication also indicated the price of the land as Rs. 1,30,000/-per Katha as that of the Core Committee. The records do not reveal any deliberations made by the Cabinet. It simply endorsed the proposal including the price of the land. 42. The Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) in his aforementioned communication also indicated the price of the land as Rs. 1,30,000/-per Katha as that of the Core Committee. However, his observation about the importance of the land was only taken into account towards a hike in the price of the land which is almost four times high than the said price. It was in this context the Petitioners had written the letter dated 15.6.2004 to the Government for a review of the decision. The recommendation made by the Core Committee towards fixation of price of the land was on the basis of the latest assessment made by the Revenue Department which is reflected in their abovereferred letter dated 5.12.2003 indicating the category of the land as "C" and the value thereof as Rs. 1,30,000/-per Katha. It is on record that the value of the land over which the main Stadium Complex is being constructed from which the land in question is about 2 kms. away has been assessed as Rs. 71,000/- per Katha. However, it is the stand of the State Government that there cannot be any comparison of the said land with that of the land in question. According to the affidavit filed by the Respondents the said land is low-lying as against the land in question being contact and solid. However, it is also on record that about 22 Bighas of land of the land in question, is also low-lying requiring earth filling. The Respondents while adopting the strange formula of fixing the price did not take these aspects of the matter into consideration. 43. It is true that the authority of the Respondents is conferred with the discretion to fix the price of the land. It is in that context the Chief Minister of the State endorsed the note to fix the same in consultation with the concerned department. However, instead of doing that the report of the committee constituted by the Chief Secretary was placed before the Chief Minister. The discretion cannot be arbitrary and devoid of reasons. Such discretion is governed by the Maxim discretio est discemere per legem qiud sit justum (discretion consists of knowing what is just in law). The discretion in general is the discernment of what is right and proper. The discretion cannot be arbitrary and devoid of reasons. Such discretion is governed by the Maxim discretio est discemere per legem qiud sit justum (discretion consists of knowing what is just in law). The discretion in general is the discernment of what is right and proper. It denotes knowledge and prudence, that discernment which enables a person to judge critically of what is correct and proper united with caution, to discern between falsity and truth, between shadow and substance, between equity and colourable glosses and pretences and not to do according to the will and private affections and ill will. It has to be done according to the mles of reasons and justice, not according to private opinion. It has to be done according to law and not humour It is not arbitrary, vague and fanciful but legal and regular. 44. The most important aspect of the matter to be home in mind is that the 33rd National Games which is scheduled to be held in Guwahati, Assamis fast approaching with the target date of 12.11.2005 and the project is required to be completed and handed over to the Respondents on or before 1.10.2005. Works are required to be carried out in war footing. When none of the contenders came forward with any concrete proposal, it was the Petitioner company which undertook to complete the project within the time frame taking the same to be a prestigious venture. In the process it entered into agreement with Singapore based consortium There is no gain saying that the holding of National Games in Guwahati, Assam will be an important event not only for the State but for the entire North Eastern Region. Holding of the National Games will naturally lead to upliftment of not only of the area but also of the entire city, the gate way of North Eastern region. Any amount of delay in completion of the project would frustrate the much cherished desire and goal of the State and for that matter the public in general to hold the National Games. 45. For the foregoing reasons and discussions, I am of the considered opinion that the balance of equity, fairplay and the doctrine of promissory estoppel tilt in favour of the Petitioners. 45. For the foregoing reasons and discussions, I am of the considered opinion that the balance of equity, fairplay and the doctrine of promissory estoppel tilt in favour of the Petitioners. During the course of hearing of the case, learned counsel for the Petitioners indicated that the Petitioners are not opposed to even 10% hike of the price of Rs. 1,30,000/- fixed by the Core Committee. On the other hand, the officials who were present in the Court suggested the price to be not less than Rs. 3,00,000/-. One of the sale deeds produced by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M), although not pertaining to the same area and in a much developed area, has shown the price of the land in the sale deed as Rs. 2,00,000/- per Katha. The price of the adjacent land on which the main stadium complex is being constructed has been shown to be Rs. 71,000/- per Katha. Similarly in respect of other adjacent land for winch acquisition proceeding has been initiated, the price has been shown as Rs. 71,000/-. In the instant case as against original showing of the price at Rs. 71,000/- per Katha, same was increased to Rs. 1,30,000/- as per recommendations of the Core Committee. Throughout such fixation of price, the Petitioners were apprised of the same. However, at the final stage, the price was arbitrarily enhanced ro Rs. 5,00,000/- unilaterally without taking the Petitioner into confidence and putting them to any kind of notice. 46. In Such a situation, although in strict application of the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Petitioners cannot be forced to pay the price of the land beyond Rs. 1,30,000/-, more particularly having regard to their agreement to all the terms and conditions of the Respondents, I am of the considered opinion that taking into account all the aforesaid factors together, it will be just and proper to arrive at a consensus keeping in mind the urgency and importance of the project, by way of fixing the price of the land in question at Rs. 1,50,000/- per Katha, to which the petitioners have also, more or less, as a good gesture, agreed. I hasten to add that the Writ Court does not normally make any such assessment on its own nor does it ordinarily issue a mandamus in such matter. This is the general principle. 1,50,000/- per Katha, to which the petitioners have also, more or less, as a good gesture, agreed. I hasten to add that the Writ Court does not normally make any such assessment on its own nor does it ordinarily issue a mandamus in such matter. This is the general principle. However, it is not as if there are no exceptions to this general principle. The occasions where the Court issued a writ of certiorari and quashed an order and had also issued a mandamus at the same time to the State could be very rare, but at the same time, the power of this Court to mould the relief in the interest of justice in the extra-ordinary cases as in the instant case cannot be doubted. 47. In the case of Dwaraka Nath v. ITO as reported in AIR 1966SC 81, the Apex Court observed that our Constitution designedly used wide language in Article 226 to enable the Courts to "reach justice wherever found necessary" and to "mould the reliefs to meet the peculiar and complicated requirements of this country." In the case of Controller and Auditor General of India v. K.S. jagannathan as reported in (1986) 2 SCC 679 , the Apex Court dealing with the contention that a Writ Court cannot issue a mandamus to direct a public authority to exercise its discretion in a particular manner observed as follows: 20. There is thus no doubt that the High Courts in India exercising their jurisdiction under Article 226 have the power to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or to pass orders and give necessary directions where the Government or a public authority has failed to exercise or has wrongly exercised the discretion conferred upon it by a statute or a rule or a policy decision of the Government or has exercised such discretion mala fide or on irreverent considerations or by ignoring the relevant considerations and materials or in such a manner as to frustrate the object of conferring such discretion or the policy for implementing which such discretion has been conferred. In all such cases and in any other fit and proper case a High Court can, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article226, issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or pass orders and give directions to compel the performance in a proper and lawful manner of the discretion conferred upon the Government or a public authority, and in a proper case, in order to prevent injustice resulting to the parties concerned, the court 'may it pass an order or give directions which the Government or the public authority should have passed' or given had it properly and lawfully exercised its discretion. (emphasis supplied) 48. In the instant case, having regard to the conduct of the Respondents, urgency in the matter, public interest involved and the demand of the situation, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the said extra-ordinary power. 49. The matter does not come to an end in answering the writ petition in the above manner. Much is now required of the parties to the proceeding towards observance of all the formalities in war footing so that the entire project can be completed within the stipulated time. The Respondents will bear in mind that the pride and honour of the State is involved in holding the National Games in a befitting manner. It is the desire of the Court that the parties will sit across the table and shall strive for achieving the end result. The Petitioners shall now make all out efforts to complete the project as per the promise made by them to the Respondents. In turn, the Respondents and for that matter the concerned departments of the State shall render all possible help to the Petitioners enabling them to complete the project and hand over the same in time facilitating holding of the 33 National Games. It is the desire of the Court that unnecessary factors, which are peculiar to and characteristic of the functioning of the Government shall be avoided. There is no gain saying that Governmental decisions are proverbially slow, encumbered, as they are, by a considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process of their making. It is the desire of the Court that unnecessary factors, which are peculiar to and characteristic of the functioning of the Government shall be avoided. There is no gain saying that Governmental decisions are proverbially slow, encumbered, as they are, by a considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process of their making. As observed by the Apex Court in the case of G. Remegowda v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer as reported in AIR 1988 SC 897 , "while a private person can take instant decision a 'bureaucratic or democratic organ', it is said by a learned judge "hesitates and debates, consults and considers, speaks through paper, moves horizontally and vertically till at last it gravitates towards a conclusion, - unmindful of time and impersonally." It is the desire of the Court that such a situation will not arise in the instant case and all out efforts will be made by all concerned towards completion of the project in time. 50. The impugned fixation of price of the land in question as communicated by the impugned letter dated 10.6.2004 stands set aside and quashed. Necessary formalities will now be observed by the parties towards completion of the project in time, taking the price of the land as aforesaid. 51. Writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Petition allowed