1. Heard Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. M. Hazarika, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. A. Ajitsaria. Also heard Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. No representation on behalf of the other respondents. 2. The Assam State Text Book Production and Publication Corporation Ltd. ('the Corporation') was established in the year 1972 for production and publication of Text Books for the students of the Schools - pursuing education under State curriculum. The petitioner is an employees' union of the Corporation registered under Society Registration Act. The Corporation was settled with a plot of land measuring 3 bighas, 3 kathas and 15 lechas covered by Dag No.440 of K.P. Patta No.269 in village Sahar Guwahati under Ulubari Mouza Vide Government order No. RSS 1125/87/12 dated 16.2.1990, on which it constructed some Assam type buildings to house its office leaving the major portion of the said plot of land vacant and unused. The said Corporation prepared a plan for construction of its own office building thereon and the foundation stone of the said building was laid by the then Chief Minister of the State, Late Hiteswar Saikia on 25.1.1996 but due to non-receipt of adequate funds, it could not be executed. There is a huge arrear amount to the tune of Rs.10 crore against the bill for supply of textbooks due from some Government Departments, mainly the Education Department. In the meantime, Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority CGMDA'), respondent No.6 initiated a move for construction of modern Multi-Level Car Parking facility on the unused part of the plot of land under occupation of the Corporation to ease out the traffic congestion in the area. It is stated that a discussion was held with the hon'ble Minister of Guwahati Development Department and the Chairman of the Corporation on 4.10.2007 regarding construction of the a foresaid Car Parking Plaza and it was decided that the Corporation shall handover 3 Bighas of its land to the GMDA/Respondent No. 6 on long lease of 99 years and the net monthly revenue earned by the GMDA from the Car Parking Plaza shall be shared between GMDA-respondent No.6 and the Corporation on 50:50 basis. 3. An agreement to this effect was to be signed between the parties in this regard. 3. An agreement to this effect was to be signed between the parties in this regard. The aforesaid decision taken in the said meeting was communicated by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Guwahati Development Department to the Managing Director of the Corporation vide letter dated 5.10.2007 requesting him to convey their consent to the above proposal at the earliest. Finding no response to the aforesaid request, the respondent/Development Authority approached the authorities concerned for requisition of the land, Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Kamrup Metro District, Guwahati requisitioned vide order dated 26.10.2007, an area of land measuring 40.14 are out of the total land of the Corporation and asked the Managing Director of the Corporation to handover the possession of the said land. The Circle Officer and Executive Magistrate, Guwahati on 30.10.2007 suo motu took possession of the requisitioned land from the Corporation and issued a certificate of taking over possession of the aforesaid land. Against such action, the petitioner union represented before the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam on 30.10.2007 and made fervent prayer to take necessary steps for protection of the interest of the Government as well as the Corporation but nothing was done and then the petitioner union approached this court by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No.5709/2007, inter alia, challenging the requisition of land, which was disposed of vide order dated 21.11.2007 on the basis of a letter dated 21.11.2007 issued by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Guwahati Development Department addressed to its engaged counsel to the effect that original agreement arrived at in the discussion of the hon'ble Minister, Guwahati Development Department with the Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation with regard to sharing of net monthly revenue on 50:50 basis between the GMDA and the Corporation stands. In the said letter dated 21.11.2007, it was stated that the balance land of 3 Kathas 15 Lechas left out by the Deputy Commissioner in the requisition order is a part of the deal. The petitioner union makes a specific grievance that the area of land measuring 3 kathas, 15 lechas for construction of the office building of the Corporation has been given in the southern boundary with approach from the western side in a narrow strip measuring about 50 ft. The petitioner union makes a specific grievance that the area of land measuring 3 kathas, 15 lechas for construction of the office building of the Corporation has been given in the southern boundary with approach from the western side in a narrow strip measuring about 50 ft. along the southern boundary of the plot whereas the Corporation has always been maintaining the plot of land for construction of office building to be retained on the eastern boundary of the land facing north leaving the rest of the land for construction of the Multi-Level Car Parking Lot. According to the petitioner union, in the proposal prepared by the Corporation for its office building and the said Car Parking on its land, there was clear and distinct outlines in the drawing being incorporated in the proposal but the respondents without paying heed to the requirement of the Corporation has left the land for the office building behind the proposed Multi Level Car Parking Lot in a very high handed manner. The petitioner union is also of the view that the said land cannot be used for construction of office building, etc., due to its size and-position and, hence, requested the respondent authorities to reallocate the land for the office building of the Corporation on the eastern boundary facing the main road in the north and as per the proposal submitted by the said Corporation instead of the land given in the southern boundary with frontage on the western side. The same having being not considered, the petitioner union preferred this instant writ petition for the following reliefs - (i) To allocate land for the office building of the Corporation on the eastern boundary facing the main road in the north and as per the proposal submitted by the said Corporation instead of the land given in the southern boundary with frontage on the western side. (ii) During pendency of the writ petition, the concerned respondents not to change the nature and character of and land of the Corporation on the eastern boundary measuring 83M (North-South) x 26M (East -West) of the land measuring 50.22 Are covered by Dag No.440, K.P Patta No.269, under Ulubari Mouza near Panbazar over bridge, Guwahati. 4. Mr. (ii) During pendency of the writ petition, the concerned respondents not to change the nature and character of and land of the Corporation on the eastern boundary measuring 83M (North-South) x 26M (East -West) of the land measuring 50.22 Are covered by Dag No.440, K.P Patta No.269, under Ulubari Mouza near Panbazar over bridge, Guwahati. 4. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, producing a copy of the order dated 26.9.1995 issued by Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Guwahati submits that an area of 10.96 Are out of the Corporation's aforesaid total land has been requisitioned for widening the road and directed the Circle Officer, Guwahati Revenue Circle to deliver possession of the requisitioned land aid, therefore, it is not clear whether the Government is requisitioning the same portion of the Corporation's land for two different public purposes, namely, construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Lot and widening of road. According to Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, the Public Works Department is taking necessary steps for taking over the possession of the land requisitioned for them. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a discussion was held between the petitioner union, GMDA and Managing Director of the Corporation on 13.2.2008 for amicable settlement regarding handing over of possession of the land to GMDA for construction of the Multi Level Car Parking Plaza. In the aforesaid meeting, following decisions were taken unanimously - (1) The change of earmark of the plot meant for Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza as proposed by the Assam Text Book Corporation Employees Union could not be considered as changing of alignment of the land shall affect the viability of the project. (2) Both the options either providing accommodation of the office of the Assam Text Book Corporation or sharing of revenue shall be kept open which shall be finalized after finalization of detailed plan and estimate and detailed project report of the said Scheme by mutual discussion. (3) In due course, Managing Director of the Assam Text Book Corporation will submit their report about the option as mentioned above during their preparation of detailed Project Report by GMDA. (4) All the members present in the meeting have opined that the proposed Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza should come up at the site for greater interest of public. 5. (3) In due course, Managing Director of the Assam Text Book Corporation will submit their report about the option as mentioned above during their preparation of detailed Project Report by GMDA. (4) All the members present in the meeting have opined that the proposed Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza should come up at the site for greater interest of public. 5. The petitioner union having noticed that the Secretary, Guwahati Development Department was not in favour of changing the plot of the eastern side, convened a meeting on 1.3.2008, which was participated by all the officers and employees. In the said meeting, the following resolutions were adopted - (1) The plot of land left out of the proposed parking plaza towards the southern side of the whole plot, measuring 3 kathas 15 lechas, should remain under the ownership of the Corporation. (2) The GDD should provide a built-up floor area of 10,000 sq. feet on a ready-to-use basis in a single floor for accommodation of the Head Office of the Corporation. (3) The built-up area of 10,000 sq. feet should be within the third floor. (4) The office accommodation should be as per requirement and specification of the Corporation. However, the GDD will be entitled to recover the cost of construction of the above office space in installments from the 50 per cent of the revenue due to the Corporation. (5) The proposed revenue earnings from the project not being foreseeable at this stage, to protect the financial interest of the Corporation and to ensure transparency, it is resolved that the details and the modalities of proposed 50 per cent revenue sharing will be under the supervision of the hon'ble High Court. 6. Mr. Goswami, on instruction from his client, submits that the petitioner-union would not have any objection to handover the possession of the Corporation's land for the proposed Multi-Level Car Parking Lot if the GDDA is agreeable to providing a built-up floor area of 10,000 sq feet on a ready-to-use basis within the third floor for accommodation of the Head Office of the Corporation in addition to sharing of revenue from the Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza on 50 : 50 basis. 7. 7. Hazarika, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondent No.6 submits that the employees' union of the Corporation has no locus standi to approach this Court and to interfere in the matter of requisition of land by the Revenue authority in favour of the respondent No.6 for greater public purpose, namely, construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza at Panbazar near over bridge in Guwahati City. It is for the Corporation, as a legal entity, being a State Public Sector Undertaking, to raise objection if its interest is affected in any manner. From the correspondence made between the Corporation and the concerned Government Department, there is, according to Mrs. Hazarika, no indication that the Corporation had, at any stage, raised any objection to the construction of the aforesaid Car Parking on a portion of the plot of land under its possession. There is no dispute that a decision has already been taken to the effect that the Corporation would give & portion of the land on long lease of 99 years for construction of the aforesaid Car Parking Plaza and sharing the monthly revenue to be earned therefrom on 50:50 basis. The balance land of 3 kathas, 15 lechas have been left for the Corporation to construct its office building. According to Mrs. Hazarika, no stipulation was made in the aforesaid discussion/agreement that the respondent No.6 would construct the office building for the Corporation or provide built-up area of 10,000 sq. feet on a ready-to-use basis in a particular floor as insisted by the petitioner union. Therefore, the question of offering office space to the Corporation in addition to revenue sharing does not arise. Similarly, the question of shifting the site for the office building of the Corporation from the southern to the eastern boundary, as demanded by the petitioner union, also does not arise inasmuch as the reallocation or realignment of the land would affect the viability of the project and the interest of the public in general. In view of the above, according to Mrs. Hazarika, the question of consideration and acceptance of the demand of the petitioner-union for providing accommodation for the office building of the Corporation in a particular floor at this stage also does not arise and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. Hazarika, the question of consideration and acceptance of the demand of the petitioner-union for providing accommodation for the office building of the Corporation in a particular floor at this stage also does not arise and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. From the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the materials made available before this court, it is an indisputable fact that an area of 40.14 Are out of 3 bighas, 3 kathas and 15 lechas of the Corporation's land covered under Dag No.440, K.P. Patta No.269 under Ulubari Mouza was requisitioned by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Kamrup Metropolitan City and the possession of the same was handed over to the respondent No.6 for construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza and on the basis of discussion held on 13.2.2008 between the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Guwahati Development Department, Managing Director of the Corporation, GMDA (respondent No.6) and the employees' union of the Corporation (petitioner), a draft memorandum of agreement was prepared by the respondent No.6 and the same was sent to the managing director of the Corporation for approval and signing vide letter dated 6.6.2008 (Annexure K to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No.6). On receipt of the said draft agreement, the Managing Director of the Corporation addressed a letter dated 4.8.2008 (Annexure L to the said counter affidavit of the respondent No.6) to the Chief Executive Officer of the GMDA making the following queries - (i) In clause 7(c) of the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA), the name of the two parties who shall share the any other revenue during the BOT period, as mentioned in the clause, are not clearly mentioned. That may be specified in the clause for more transparency of the MOA (ii) In the referred Memorandum, with whom the ultimate ownership of the land will sustain after expiry of the lease period is not mentioned. That should also be mentioned for better transparency of the MOA. 9. In the aforesaid letter dated 4.8.2008, it does not transpire that the Corporation ever asked for shifting, realignment or readjustment of the site or demanded any accommodation in addition to sharing of revenue on 50:50 basis. That should also be mentioned for better transparency of the MOA. 9. In the aforesaid letter dated 4.8.2008, it does not transpire that the Corporation ever asked for shifting, realignment or readjustment of the site or demanded any accommodation in addition to sharing of revenue on 50:50 basis. It is also to be noted that Managing Director of the Corporation in his aforesaid letter dated 4.8.2008 did not mention anything about the aforesaid discussions in the meeting held on 13.2.2008 in which a decision was arrived at unanimously to the effect that both the options either providing accommodation of the office of the Corporation or sharing of revenue shall be kept open and be finalized after finalization of detailed plan and estimate and detailed project report of the said Scheme by mutual discussion. It was further decided in the said meeting that in due course, the Managing Director of the Corporation would submit their report about the option as mentioned above during the preparation of detailed Project Report by GMDA. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No.6, the same was not denied rather it accepted. Para 4(ix) of the said affidavit is reproduced below : "(ix) That on and around 28.1.2008 the instant writ petition was filed by the petitioner and pursuant to the observations made by this hon'ble Court, a meeting was held on 13.2.2008 between the Secretary, Guwahati Development Department, the Deponent, The Assam State Text Book Corporation Employees' Union and the Managing Director, Assam State Text Book Production and Publication Corporation Ltd. to arrive at a consensus in the matter of the multilevel car parking project. In the said meeting the members present unanimously arrived at the following decisions - (a) that the change in the plot earmarked for the Multilevel Car Parking Project as proposed by the present petitioner could not be considered as change in the alignment would effect the viability of the project. (b) Both the options of either providing accommodation for the office of the Assam State Text Book Production and Publication Corporation Ltd. or sharing of revenue shall be kept open and be finalized after finalization of the detailed plan and estimate and detailed project report of the scheme by mutual discussion. (b) Both the options of either providing accommodation for the office of the Assam State Text Book Production and Publication Corporation Ltd. or sharing of revenue shall be kept open and be finalized after finalization of the detailed plan and estimate and detailed project report of the scheme by mutual discussion. (c) In due course the Managing Director of the Assam State Text Book Production and Publication Corporation Ltd. will submit a report about the option during the preparation of detail Project Report." 10. What is to be noted here is that the detailed plan and estimate is yet to be finalized and the detailed Project Report of the Scheme, namely, construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza is yet to be prepared by mutual discussion and, therefore, there is a scope for consideration of the option providing accommodation for the office of the Corporation in addition to the revenue sharing. Moreover, the memorandum of agreement between the Corporation and the respondent No.6 is yet to be executed. For the purpose of providing accommodation for office of the Corporation, there is yet another option by way of handing over the possession of the remaining 3 kathas, 15 lechas of land to the respondent No.6 for construction of the office building along with aforesaid Car Parking Plaza. The petitioner-union, in technical sense, may not have a locus standi to file the present writ petition but they are concerned with the survival of the Corporation and their livelihood because it is a fact that the Corporation could not undertake construction of its own office building in spite of in possession of such a big plot of land, as it could not mobilize fund and it could not realize the arrear amounts from the Education Department against the bills for printing, production and publication of text books for the school students. Moreover, the Corporation is also suffering great loss financially creating apprehension in the minds of the employees particularly, the low paid ones, of being closed down and, thus, creating uncertainty in their means of livelihood. Moreover, the Corporation is also suffering great loss financially creating apprehension in the minds of the employees particularly, the low paid ones, of being closed down and, thus, creating uncertainty in their means of livelihood. One should not loose sight of the fact that the Respondent No.6/GMDA and the respondent No-5/Corporation, on record, have been allowing the petitioner union to have its say and allowed it to participate in the meeting particularly, the aforesaid meeting dated 13.2.2008 regarding handing over of possession of the Corporation's land to Respondent No.6 for construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza. The petitioner-union having been allowed to participate in the proceedings of the meeting, in my considered view, the respondent No.6 has lost its right to oppose the filing of the present writ petition on the ground of locus standi. The staff/employees of the Corporation are interested parties for survival and betterment of the Corporation in the greater interest of the public and one should not see ill into it. It is in all fairness on the part of the petitioner-union that it has dropped the demand for shifting, realignment and readjustment of the site and honestly agreed to construction of the aforesaid Car Parking Plaza and confined its demand to providing accommodation for the office of the Corporation. As I have already observed earlier that the option of proving accommodation for the office of the Corporation in the Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza is still open inasmuch as the detailed plan and estimate is yet to be finalized and the detailed project report of the Scheme by mutual discussion is yet to be prepared. The other option is that the Corporation may allow the respondent No.6 to utilize the regaining portion of the plot of land measuring 3 Kathas 15 Lechas left with the Corporation for construction of its office building. This may be considered and finalized by the parties on certain terms and conditions in addition to sharing of monthly revenue on 50:50 basis. 11. The construction of a permanent building to house the office of the Corporation is as much important as the construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza. This may be considered and finalized by the parties on certain terms and conditions in addition to sharing of monthly revenue on 50:50 basis. 11. The construction of a permanent building to house the office of the Corporation is as much important as the construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza. The former is directly connected with the academic interest of the State inasmuch as the Corporation is entrusted with production and publication of text books, particularly for the School students and the later with easing out the traffic congestion in the busy area of Panbazar of the Capital City of Assam. The State respondents are duty bound to pay due attention to the aforesaid important public demands, after all respondents are Government departments/authorities of a welfare State and they should take a decision to construct the Corporation's office building exploring the above options. The petitioner-union is not opposing the construction of the Car Parking Plaza. Nor is it opposing the handing over of possession of the land already requisitioned for respondent No.6. Nor is it adamant to reallocation/realignment of the site. The petitioner-union is adamant only to having its office building or sufficient accommodation for its Corporation's office within the Scheme of the aforesaid Car Parking Plaza. Such accommodation for the Corporation can be provided within the proposed Car Parking Plaza to be constructed within the area of the land requisitioned for respondent No.6 on the agreed terms of sharing of monthly revenue on 50:50 basis. If the same is not feasible on the part of the respondent No.6, it may negotiate with the Corporation to hand over the possession of balance area of land outside the requisitioned area which is still under the possession of the Corporation, for construction of office building of the Corporation by the respondent No.6 by entering into a separate agreement. 12. In view of the facts and circumstances and the discussions made above, this writ petition is closed with a direction to the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to explore the options mentioned above for the greater public interest. The respondent Nos. 12. In view of the facts and circumstances and the discussions made above, this writ petition is closed with a direction to the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to explore the options mentioned above for the greater public interest. The respondent Nos. 5 and 6 are directed to finalize the draft agreement and sign the final one between themselves for construction of Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza and finalize detailed plan and estimate immediately, if the same is not yet finalized, prepare the detailed project report of the Scheme by mutual discussion and start the construction work forthwith. It is also directed that the respondent No.2, Commissioner-cum-Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education (Elementary) Department, Sachibalaya, Dispur shall initiate negotiation with the respondent No.6 to explore the possibility of construction of an office building/accommodation in the proposed Multi-Level Car Parking Plaza within the plot of land requisitioned by the Government for respondent No.6 or in the alternative, on the balance area of 3 kathas, 15 lechas under the possession of the Corporation, on a mutually agreed terms and conditions independent of the agreement that may be signed between the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 for construction of the aforesaid Car Parking Plaza which would not be dependent on exploration of possibility of construction of office building/accommodation but in any case and under any circumstances, the respondent-authorities are directed to take necessary steps to explore the possibility of construction of an office building/accommodation for Corporation to house its office on the aforesaid plot of land either on the site requisitioned within the Car Parking Plaza Scheme or on the balance plot of land under the occupation of the Corporation. 13. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands closed. However, there shall be no order as to cost.