Dismissed

Ramkhelavan v. State of U P and 6 Others

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2019WRIC/6712/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court rejected the petitioner's writ petition seeking to rename a government school after his late father. The bench held that no condition regarding the school's name was ever accepted by the State when the land was donated, and promissory estoppel is not applicable in the absence of such a promise or governing provision.

What did the court decide?

Application for mandamus to rename the school dismissed.

Ramkhelavan Vs State of U P and 6 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6712 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ramkhelavan Respondent :- State Of U P And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Kumar,Abhai Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶5

Only prayer made in the writ petition is that the respondents be directed to change the name of Government High School, Lal Nagar, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) by adding name late Bodai Pal.

¶6

It is contended that the petitioner gifted part of land Plot No. 308 area 0.460 hectare situated at village Hariharpur @ Shukulpur, Tehsil Aurai, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) whereof half of the portion is gifted to State Government but it was also requested that name of petitioner's father Bodai Pal be given to the Government School. It is stated that the said proposal of petitioner was accepted by District Magistrate vide letter dated 20.7.2011 whereby he granted permission to petitioner to donate said land in favour of State, but no other condition was accepted. Letter of District Inspector of School communicated to District Magistrate dated 20.7.2011.

¶7

The petitioner accepted the said communication. Thereafter, gift deed was executed between petitioner and State Government on 5.9.2011. Petitioner now claim that name of the school should be in the name of petitioner's father whereupon proposal was made by District Magistrate and for which various representations were made to District Inspector of Schools and District Magistrate concerned.

¶8

In the writ petition seeking mandamus commanding respondents that Government High School, Lala Nagar, District Sant Ravidas

¶9

Nagar (Bhadohi) be named after late Bodai Pal, learned counsel for petitioner stated that there is promissory estopple to apply, since land was donated with the condition that the name of petitioner's father shall be given to the Government School, therefore, mandamus should be issued.

¶10

We do not find that State Government has accepted petitioner's proposal for donation of land in dispute with the condition that name of petitioner's father be given to the School. We have already gone through letter of District Inspector of Schools and it nowhere shows that there was acceptance on the part of State that name of Institution / School shall be kept in the name of petitioner's father. Petitioner's offer was accepted by State without any condition. Petitioner ageed therewith, executed gift deed of the land to State. In absence of any promise by State, keeping name of Institution / School in the name of petitioner's father, there cannot be issued any mandamus therefor.

¶11

We do not find principle of promissory estopple are applicable in the case of petitioner, since there is no such promise.

¶12

learned counsel for the petitioner also could not show any provision under which name of any School / Institution should / must be kept in the name of any relative of the donor.

¶13

In view thereof, no mandamus can be issued as prayed for.

¶14

Dismissed accordingly.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.4.2019 Manoj

Ramkhelavan v. State of U P and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramkhelavan v. State of U P and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Kumari Vs Asst. General Manager State Bank of India and Another

Managing Director U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. Lucknow Vs Shri Kamlesh Singh Chauhan and Others

State of U.P. and Others Vs M.C. Dowell and Company Ltd. and Another

Ram Bachan Vs District Magistrate Mau and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Shiv Nath Singh Vs Union of India through Secretary Min. of Finance and Others