Judgment R.M. Lodha, J.-Jaipur, popularly known as Pink City, besides the capital of the State of Rajasthan is an important tourist destination. The growth of the city is rapid. It is rated as one of the fastest growing cities in the country. M/s. R.F. Properties & Trading Private Limited (Respondent No. 4) says that the World Trade Park to be built by them shall be State of Art building to provide international show-case to the state industry. The building is to have a computer controlled integrated building management system, wireless LAN, Trade Information Bureau, Electronic Trading Facilities, Electronic Facilities for export enquiries, Auditoriums, Convention Center, Trade Fair Zones, Exhibition Centers, Showrooms, Display Centers, Corporate Offices, Guest Rooms, Multiplex, Conference Rooms with Video Conferencing Facilities and Business Centers. The building shall have special zones for B.P.O. Industry and service providers, Bio-Technology, Information Technology, Banking and Insurance, Gems and Jewelery, Handicrafts and Textiles etc. The Respondent No. 4 claims that the World Trade Park would increase business tourism, enhance investment in State, increase employment by providing direct employment to around 5,000 persons and indirect employment to around 20,000 persons. It shall be open to all, irrespective of segment or industry and empower the people of Rajasthan and provide them with a word of opportunities. The Allotment 2. On 01.09.2004, the Respondent No. 4 submitted a proposal to the State Government for creating World Trade Center at Jaipur alongwith request for allotment of land. A presentation is said to have been made by the Respondent No. 4 on that very day. In the presentation, the Respondent No. 4 highlighted that Jaipur may be brought to a new pedestal for economic growth and up-liftment by providing state of the art World Trade Park. 3. Considering the nature of the proposed development, the State Government asked the Jaipur Development Authority (J.D.A.) to submit its comments on the proposal made by the Respondent No. 4. 4. The J.D.A. vide its communication dated 13.09.2004 provided its comments to the State Government observing that from the perusal of the project report and presentation, the utility of the project was extremely important for the city of Jaipur as it would bring in revenue augmentation, employment generation, industrial development and business investment due to provision for IT enabled services, place for international trade fairs, conferences, convention center etc. In response to the request of the Respondent No. 4 for allotment of 17,000 to 20,000 Square Meters, the J.D.A. stated that the land ad-measuring 16338 square meters available on Jawahar Lal Nehru Road (J.L.N. Road) can be considered for allotment. About the rate of the land, some instances were referred to in the comments and J.D.A. noticed that the commercial reserve for J.L.N. Road has not been declared. 5. After receipt of comments from the J.D.A., a decision was taken by the Urban Development Department to place the matter for consideration in Board of Infrastructure Development and Investment Promotion (B.I.D.I.). the J.D.A. was, accordingly, asked to submit the report for placing the matter before B.I.D.I. 6. On 011.2004, the J.D.A. sent a detailed note to be placed for consideration by B.I.D.I. 7. The matter was placed before the 17th Meeting of B.I.D.I. held on 112.2004. The B.I.D.I. directed the Chief Secretary and the Additional Chief Secretary to Chief Minister to examine the issue and submit their recommendations regarding terms of allotment in the next meeting after obtaining the project report and company profile from the Respondent No. 4. 8. On 18.01.2005 pursuant to the direction of B.I.D.I., the Chief Secretary held the meeting and directed the J.D.A. and Finance Department to study the entire matter and place the matter for consideration by B.I.D.I. once the views of the concerned Departments were available alongwith the past precedents for consideration and final decision. 9. As per the meeting held by the Chief Secretary on 18.01.2005 and decision taken therein, the J.D.A. considered the issue once again and vide its communication dated 24.02.2005 recommended designation of the project as infrastructure project. The J.D.A. also proposed the rate of Rs. 25,000/-per square meter. 10. On 19.04.2005, the Notification under Section 25(1) of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (for short, the J.D.A. Act) was published in Official Gazette pursuant to the order of the State Government dated 15.01.2002 directing the J.D.A. to affect change in land sue on J.L.N. Marg from institutional to institutional and commercial. 11. In the 18th meeting of B.I.D.I. held on 20.04.2005, the matter concerning the allotment of land to the Respondent No. 4 was considered and it was directed to the Department of Urban Development to allot 17579.7 Square Meters of land surrendered by the Mahalaxmi Society on J.L.N. Marg to the Respondent No. 4 at Rs. 11. In the 18th meeting of B.I.D.I. held on 20.04.2005, the matter concerning the allotment of land to the Respondent No. 4 was considered and it was directed to the Department of Urban Development to allot 17579.7 Square Meters of land surrendered by the Mahalaxmi Society on J.L.N. Marg to the Respondent No. 4 at Rs. 25,000 per square meter. As per the said decision, the Respondent No. 4 would pay 15% of the total amount due upfront before possession was handed over and the balance with interest at 12% per annum in six half yearly instalments. The FAR for the project was restricted to 1.75 and it was made clear that the project shall be completed within two years from the date of taking possession and that no other concession would be provided to the Respondent No. 4. 12. In compliance of the decision taken by B.I.D.I. on 20.04.2005, the Respondent No. 4 deposited a sum of Rs. 7,07,36,763/-on 21.05.2005 including 15% of the total amount due upfront. 13. On 02.07.2005 the J.D.A. issued allotment letter to the Respondent No. 4. After the allotment letter was issued by the J.D.A., the Respondent No. 4 submitted the building plans to J.D.A. for approval. The B.P.C. considered the proposed building in the category of special category building and, accordingly, moved the State Government for its sanction. 14. On 31.08.2005, the State Government passed an order extending relaxation to the provisions of the building regulations in relation to the specific matters like height and basement. 15. On 211.2005, the building plans were approved by the J.D.A. 16. The lease deed for the land allotted to the Respondent No. 4 was executed by the J.D.A. and duly registered 011.2006. The petitioner 17. The petitioner is a practicing lawyer of this Court. According to him on 28.08.2005, a news item appeared in the Hindi Daily published from Jaipur about the scam in the land allotted to the Respondent No. 4 by the J.D.A. Through this news item he came to know that the land that belonged to Mahalaxmi Housing Society was surrendered to the J.D.A. for the purpose of public utility/facility. He, according, made necessary enquiries and decided to challenge the allotment of the aforesaid land to the Respondent No. 4 by the J.D.A. in the public interest. The challenge to the allotment 18. He, according, made necessary enquiries and decided to challenge the allotment of the aforesaid land to the Respondent No. 4 by the J.D.A. in the public interest. The challenge to the allotment 18. In the writ petition the petitioner has challenged the allotment of the prime land on J.L.N. Road to the Respondent No. 4 on diverse grounds. The petitioner has set up the case that the land of commercial nature and the allotment being also for the commercial purposes, under Rule 15 of the Rajasthan Improvement Trust (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 (for short Rules of 1974), could have only been disposed of by public auction. According to him World Trade Park project is not covered by the infrastructure projects mentioned in Rule 15-B of the Rules of 1974 and, therefore, Rule 15-B for allotment of the said land to the Respondent No. 4 was not attracted. The plea has also been raised that the State Government and the J.D.A. could not have allotted institutional land to any private company for commercial purposes and there is no provisions in the J.D.A. Act and the Rules of 1974 for disposal of institutional land for the purposes of commercial nature. The petitioner has alleged that the State Government and the J.D.A. malafidely allotted the land to the Respondent No. 4 @ Rs. 25,000/-per square meter to give undue benefit and favour to the Respondent No. 4. The submissions 19. During the course of arguments, the petitioner crystallized his submissions thus : .(i) That under Section 54 of the J.D.A. Act as well as Rules 15 and 15-B of the Rules of 1974, the power to allot land is vested in the J.D.A. and not the State Government. The State Government is required to grant only approval under Rule 15-B of the Rules. The J.D.A., therefore, cannot abdicate its power to the State Government and the State Government cannot usurp power of J.D.A. under the said Rules. Reliance is placed on the decisions viz., Commissioner of Police vs. Goverdhan Das Bhanji, AIR 1952 SC Page 16; State of Assam vs. Keshav, AIR 1953 SC Page 309; State of Punjab vs. Hari Kishan Sharma, AIR 1966 SC Page 1081; The Pratabpore Company Limited vs. Cane Commissioner of Bihar, 1969 (1) Supreme Court Cases 308 and Chandrika Jha vs. State of Bihar & Ors., AIR 1984 SC 322 . .(ii) The State Government has no power to give direction in individual or particular case either under Section 54 or 90 of the J.D.A. Act or the Rules 15 and 15-B of the Rules of 1974. The State Government can only direct the J.D.A. to exercise its power and perform its duty in accordance with the policy framed and the guidelines laid down from time to time. The policy and guidelines can be issued for general application or for a class of persons or area or based on some other criteria in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Reliance is placed on the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the Case of Ganga Retreat & Towers Limited & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2003 (12) Supreme Court Cases 91. (iii) The land of commercial purpose can be sold only through public auction under the Rules of 1974. Even if the law is silent, the fairness demands that public land is sold only through public auction and not privately. This is necessary to ensure transparency and avoid arbitrariness. Reliance is placed on the Judgment s of the Supreme Court viz., Ramanna Dayaram Shetty vs. International Air Port Authority, 1979 (3) Supreme Court Cases 489; Kasturilal vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir, 1980 (4) Supreme Court Cases 1; State of U.P. vs. Shivcharan Sharma, 1981 Supplementary SCC 84; Ram & Shyam Company vs. State of Haryana, 1985 (3) SCC 267 ; Chenchu Rami Reddy vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1986 SC 1158 ; Sachchidanand Pandey vs. State of West Bengal, 1987 (2) SCC 295 ; Haji T.M. Hassan Rawther vs. Kerala Finance Corporation, 1988 (1) SCC 166 ; R. Venugopala Naidu vs. Venkatarayulu Naidu Charities, 1989 Supplementary (2) SCC 356 and Mahesh Chandra vs. Regional Manager U.P. Financial Corporation & Ors., 1993 (2) SCC 279 . Reliance is also placed on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 19.05.1995 in the case of Gurunanak Tubewel Private Limited vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (iv) The allotment had not been made under Rule 15-B nor it could have been made under the said Rule because the project of World Trade Park is not an infrastructure project. The Agenda dated 112.2004 prepared by the J.D.A. and submitted by Urban Development and Housing Department mentions that the project is commercial project. (iv) The allotment had not been made under Rule 15-B nor it could have been made under the said Rule because the project of World Trade Park is not an infrastructure project. The Agenda dated 112.2004 prepared by the J.D.A. and submitted by Urban Development and Housing Department mentions that the project is commercial project. The allotment letter dated 02.07.2005 mentions that the land shall be used for commercial purpose. The lease deed dated 011.2006 in its title mentions commercial use and so also Condition No. 4. That the word "includes" in Rule 15-B of the Rules of 1974 is exhaustive and the World Trade Park project does not fall in any of the categories of the infrastructure projects mentioned in Rule 15-B. Reliance is placed on Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Southern Gujarat Roofing Tiles Manufactures Association vs. The State of Gujarat, AIR 1977 SC 90 . .(v) Rules of business framed under Article 166 cannot override the provisions of the J.D.A. Act and the Rules of 1974. Response by the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 20. In the reply filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 on 21.03.2007, preliminary objection has been raised that the writ petition suffers from delay and laches. The decision was taken by B.I.D. on 20.04.2005 for the allotment of land to the Respondent No. 4 for establishment of World Trade Park and the formal allotment was made by the J.D.A. on 02.07.2005. By that time the Respondent No. 4 had deposited Rs. 35,31,13,355/-with the J.D.A. The lease deed has been executed on 011.2006 on a stamp paper of over Rs. 3.00 crores and it has been registered. The construction work is in progress. 21. That the B.I.D.I. has been constituted by amendment in the Rajasthan Rules of Business vide order dated 15.01.2005 which is high power committee headed by the Chief Minister. The decision to allot the land has been taken by the B.I.D.I. in accordance with law. Vide Gazette Notification dated 16.04.2005, the use of the land on J.L.N. Marg has been changed. Alongwith use of institutions, use of land for commercial and commercial establishment was added. The decision to allot the land has been taken by the B.I.D.I. in accordance with law. Vide Gazette Notification dated 16.04.2005, the use of the land on J.L.N. Marg has been changed. Alongwith use of institutions, use of land for commercial and commercial establishment was added. In the additional affidavit of the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Rajasthan filed on 28.04.2007 various instances of allotment of land by the B.I.D.I. from time to time at difference prices has been set out to justify the allotment of land to Respondent No. 4 at the rate of Rs. 25,000/-per square meter. An additional affidavit has also been filed by Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority on 28.04.2007. Response by the Respondent No. 4 22. The Respondent No. 4 filed its counter affidavit on 26.03.2007 and stated that the World Trade Park is multi activity infrastructure project for promoting investment, business, trade and industrial opportunities in the city of Jaipur. The project inter-alia provides for trade zones, platform for global trade international trade, business investment and multifarious activities to promote business and trade through various events schedules/calendars. They have sought dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of res-judicata as four other writ petitions challenging the said allotment had been dismissed by this Court and in one of the matters, the special leave petition filed from the order of dismissal of the writ petition also came to be dismissed. They have also reiterated the preliminary objection of delay and laches. They have justified the allotment of land to them as their project was covered in the category of infrastructure Project and by Rule 15-B of the rules of 1974. According to them before the allotment of land, the decision making process had been elaborate and all the factors were considered by the B.I.D.I. They have given the details of the expenditures so far incurred on the project. 23. The petitioner has filed rejoinder as well as few other additional affidavits on different dates, the last of such affidavits is dated 01.05.2007. The JDA Act 24. 23. The petitioner has filed rejoinder as well as few other additional affidavits on different dates, the last of such affidavits is dated 01.05.2007. The JDA Act 24. The Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982, for short (for short, "Act of 1982") was enacted for setting up the authority namely J.D.A. for the purpose of planning, coordinating and supervising the proper, orderly and rapid development of the Jaipur City and areas contiguous to it and to enable the J.D.A. to either itself or through other authority to formulate and execute the plans, projects and schemes for the developments of Jaipur Region so that housing, community facilities, civic amenities and other infrastructure are properly created for the population of Jaipur Region in the perspective of 21st Century. Consequent upon the Act of 1982 JDA was constituted under Section 3. Its composition is provided in Section 4. Since the main object of the J.D.A. is to secure the integrated development of Jaipur Region, Section 16 provides for functions of the J.D.A. that, inter-alia, provides formulation and sanction of the projects and schemes for the development of Jaipur Region and also execution of the projects and schemes. The provisions for Master Development Plan and Zonal Development Plan are contained in Sections 21 to 28. Sections 29 to 37 deal with the control of development and use of land included in the plans. Sections 38 to 43 make provision for projects and schemes. Acquisition and disposal of land are provided in Sections 44 to 64. 25. Section 54 is reproduced as it is : "54. Sections 29 to 37 deal with the control of development and use of land included in the plans. Sections 38 to 43 make provision for projects and schemes. Acquisition and disposal of land are provided in Sections 44 to 64. 25. Section 54 is reproduced as it is : "54. Land to vest in the Authority and its disposal- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (Rajasthan Act No. 15 of 1956), the land as defined in Section 103 of that Act, excluding land referred to in Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (a) of the said section and nazul land placed at the disposal of a local authority under Section 102-A of that Act in Jaipur Region shall, immediately after establishment of the Authority under Section 3 of this Act, be deemed to have been placed at the disposal of and vested in the Authority which shall take over such land for and on behalf of the State Government and may use the same for the purposes of this Act and may dispose of the same (by way of allotment, regularization or auction) subject to such conditions and restrictions as the State Government may, from time to time, lay down and in such manner, as it may, from time to time, prescribe : Provided that the Authority may dispose of any such land- .(a) without undertaking or carrying out any development thereon; or .(b) after undertaking or carrying out such development as it thinks fit, to such person, in such manner and subject to such covenants and conditions, as it may consider expedient to impose for securing development according to plan. (2) No development of any land shall be undertaken or carried out except by or under the control and supervision of the Authority. (2) No development of any land shall be undertaken or carried out except by or under the control and supervision of the Authority. [(3) If any land vested in the Authority is required at any time by the Nagar Nigam, Jaipur for carrying out its functions, or by the State Government for any other purpose, the State Government may, by notification is the Official Gazette, place such land at the disposal of the Nagar Nigam, Jaipur or any Department of the State Government on such terms and conditions, as may be deemed fit.] .(4) All land acquired by the Authority, or by the State Government and transferred to the Authority, shall be disposed of by the Authority in the same manner as may be prescribed for land in Sub-section (1)". 26. Then there is Section 90 that provides for control by the State Government in the functions of the J.D.A. It reads thus : "90. Control by the State Government- .(1) The Authority shall exercise its powers and perform its duties under this Act in accordance with the policy framed and the guidelines laid down, from time to time by the State Government for development of the areas in the Jaipur Region. .(2) The Authority shall be bound to comply with such directions which may be issued, from time to time, by the State Government for efficient administration of this Act. .(3) If , in connection with the exercise of the powers and the performance of the duties of the Authority under this Act, any dispute, arises between the Authority and the State Government, the matter shall be decided by the State Government and its decision shall be final". Disposal of Urban Land Rules 27. That the Rules called the Rajasthan Improvement Trust (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 (for short, Rules of 1974) continue to operate even after coming into force of the Act of 1982 is not in dispute before us. Rule 15 reads thus : "15. Allotment and sale of non-residential land-Land for non residential purposes shall be allotted to public and charitable institutions on terms and conditions prescribed under these rules provided that lands of commercial nature shall be disposed of by public auction in the manner. [as prescribed in Annexure A] provided further that lands reserved for cinemas. Rule 15 reads thus : "15. Allotment and sale of non-residential land-Land for non residential purposes shall be allotted to public and charitable institutions on terms and conditions prescribed under these rules provided that lands of commercial nature shall be disposed of by public auction in the manner. [as prescribed in Annexure A] provided further that lands reserved for cinemas. [Luxury hotels, [Film Studios and Amusement Parks], [Hospital, Diagnostic Centre, Nursing Homes and Tourism Unit], petrol pumps and for setting up godowns by [XXX] persons having authorized agencies of domestic gas allotted to them shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of the State Government that may be issued from time to time : [Provided that plots of land for consumer Co-operative Stores duly certified to the registered with the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies of the concerned District, shall be allotted in the commercial areas on the reserve price of the scheme. The price shall be recovered in four equal annual installments : Provided further that the number and size of such plots shall be determined by the Trust in consultation with the Government.] [Provided further also that the price for allotment of land for gas godowns to be set up by War widows, member of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and handicapped persons shall be the reserve price determined for land meant for commercial use in the scheme and for other category of persons the price shall be double the reserve price determined for land meant for commercial use in the scheme]. 28. Rule 15-B that was brought in the Rules of 1974 with effect from 21.04.2001 provides that the land for infrastructure projects may be allotted on such terms and conditions and at such rates as may be determined by the State Government from time to time and after obtaining the prior approval of the State Government. We reproduced Rule 15-B as it is : "15-B. Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, land may be allotted with the prior approval of the State Government for infrastructure projects which includes power-plant, telecommunication, transport facilities, tourism units, public utilities, information technology, water supply, technical education institutions, waste disposal project, on such terms and conditions and at such rates as may be determined by the State Government from time to time". The distribution of state largesse 29. The distribution of state largesse 29. In a welfare State, the Government has to act in a fair, transparent, just and reasonable manner. It must, as said by Mr. Justice Frank further in Viteralli vs. Saton, 359 US 535, rigorously held to the standards by which it professes its actions to be judged. No action of the Government can be founded on the arbitrary exercise of power nor any individual can be chosen for distribution of states largesse on its liking. The Government cannot be permitted to justify its action in favour of any person on the ground of its discretion to do so unless such exercise of discretion is founded with clear cut guidelines and policy bereft of unreasonableness or arbitrariness. 30. The Government, said the Supreme Court in the case of Ramanna D. Shetty, does not stand in the position as that of private individual and being the Government, when it acts in the matter of granting largesse cannot act arbitrary. In Ramanna D. Shetty the Supreme Court agreed with the observations made in V. Punnan Thomas vs. State of Kerala, AIR 1969 Ker 81 , that the Government, is not and should not be as free as an individual in selecting the recipients for its largesse. Whatsoever its activity, the Government is still the Government and will be subject to restraint, inherent in its position in a democratic society. A democratic Government cannot lay down arbitrary and capricious standards for the choice of persons with whom alone it will deal. Any impression that the Government has a right to enter into contractual relation like any other private individual was out rightly rejected in Ramanna D. Shetty. 1.31. In the case of Sachidanand Pandey & Anr. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors., 1987 (2) Supreme Court Cases 295, the Supreme Court observed that stated-owned or public-owned property is not to be dealt with at the absolute discretion of the executive. 2.32. Section 54 of the Act of 1982 inter-alia provides that the land vested in the J.D.A. may be disbursed by way of allotment, regularization or auction subject to such conditions and restrictions as the State Government may, from time to time, lay down and in such manner, as it may, from time to time prescribe. 3.33. The Rules of 1974 deal with the disposal of the land by way of allotment, regularization or auction. 3.33. The Rules of 1974 deal with the disposal of the land by way of allotment, regularization or auction. Rule 15-B over-rides the provisions contained in the Rules regarding disposal of the land by the authority as it provides that the land may be allotted with the prior approval of the State Government for infrastructure projects at such terms and conditions and at such rates, as may be determined by the State Government from time to time. 4.34. Though the public auction of the disposal of the Government land is the ordinary Rule, it is not invariable. In case of M.P. Oil Extraction & Anr. vs. State of M.P. & Ors., 1997 (7) Supreme Court Cases 592, the Supreme Court on consideration of some of its previous decisions in the case of Kasturi Lal Lakshmi Reddy vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir, 1980 (4) SCC 1 ; State of M.P. vs. Nandlal Jaiswal, 1986 (4) SCC 566 ; Sachidanand Pandey vs. State of West Bengal, 1987 (2) SCC 295 ; Brij Bhushan vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir, 1986 (2) SCC 345 and G.B. Mahajan vs. Jalgaon Municipal Council, 1991 (3) SCC 91 , held that although to ensure fair play and transparency in State action, distribution of largesse by inviting open tenders or by public auction is desirable but it cannot be held that in no case distribution of such largess by negotiation is permissible. The guidelines for disposal of land under Rule 15-B 35. What is important, in our considered opinion, for the purposes of exercise of power under Rule 15-B, is the existence of definite guidelines and policy for allotment of land for the purposes of infrastructure projects. The approval of the State Government has to be based on definite guidelines guidelines and the policy. Any allotment of land under Rule 15-B based on arbitrary improvisation by ad-hoc procedure to meet the exigency of a particular case cannot be countenanced and may render such decision or allotment unsustainable in law. Reserve price and competitive bidding necessarily obviates arbitrariness and provides transparency. Section 90(2) 36. Section 90(2) of the J.D.A. Act is to the effect that the State Government can direct the authority to exercise its powers and perform its duties in accordance with the policy framed and the guidelines laid down from time to time. Reserve price and competitive bidding necessarily obviates arbitrariness and provides transparency. Section 90(2) 36. Section 90(2) of the J.D.A. Act is to the effect that the State Government can direct the authority to exercise its powers and perform its duties in accordance with the policy framed and the guidelines laid down from time to time. Under this Section, the policy and guidelines can be issued for general application or for a class of persons or area or based on some other criteria as may with-stand the test of Article 14 of the Constitution. This is what was said by the Supreme Court in the case of Ganga Retreat & Towers Limited & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2003 (12) Supreme Court Cases 91. The Supreme Court went on to say further that the power conferred by Section 90 cannot be exercised by the Government to give directions in one individual or particular case. B.I.D.I. and the Rules of Business 37. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department in his affidavit filed on 25.04.2007 has stated that the Rajasthan Rules of business came to be amended by the Government of Rajasthan Vide Notification No. P. 27(6) CAB/99 dated 10.01.1999 and the existing Rule 55 of the Rules of Business was replaced by the amended Rule 55. Amended Rule 55 reads thus : "55(1) With a view to expediting the decision making in specific sectors of Governmental functioning, wherever it is considered necessary, in public interest to do so, all empowered committee may be set up by the Government in the concerned administrative department with the prior approval of the Chief Minister. Such an Empowered Committee would be fully competent to take any decision including approvals of estimates, sanctioning of expenditure granting concession and incentives etc. for achieving the objective and fulfilling the purpose for which the committee has been set up. .(2) Theproposal for setting up and Empowered Committee shall be put up for the approvals of the Chief Minister by the Secretary of the Department concerned through the Chief Secretary and Ministers/State Minister in charge of the Department. The proposal should clearly specify the composition and the purpose of setting up such a Committee as also the terms of reference including functions and powers proposed to be given to such Empowered Committee. The proposal should clearly specify the composition and the purpose of setting up such a Committee as also the terms of reference including functions and powers proposed to be given to such Empowered Committee. .(3) It would be competent for the Government to set up Committees more than one in a specific sector depending upon the requirement of the appropriate levels related to financial and other administrative implications of the subject matter. .(4) The decisions of such an Empowered Committee (s) shall be complied with by the departments which they relate and further examination and scrutiny and approval at various levels by the Departments concerned shall not be necessary." 1.38. According to the State Government, the amended Rule 55 enabled it to set up empowered committees with a view to expedite decision making in specific sectors of Government functions. 2.39. B.I.D.I. was constituted vide Notification dated 210.1999. The said Notification was superseded by the Notification dated 15.01.2005. The mandate of the B.I.D.I., inter-alia, empowers it to consider and review schemes and provide directions for accelerating investment into the State, to clear projects pertaining to investment involving Rs. 25 crores and above, dispose of the cases not decided within the stipulated time by the administrative department pertaining to investment, amendment in investment policies to approve a customize package of incentives bringing investment catalyzing employment and further investment into the State. 3.40. In the case of State of Haryana vs. P.C. Wadhwa, IPS, Inspector General of Police & Anr., 1987 (2) Supreme Court Cases 602, it was held that the Business Rules framed under Article 166 are for the convenient transaction of the