The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation II

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

“In Monnet Ispat v. Union of India, (2012) 11 SCC 1 this Court while enumerating principles relating to Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel and Legitimate Expectation has clearly held, protection of legitimate expectation does not require fulfillment of expectation where an overriding public interest requires otherwise. In other words, personal benefit must give way to public interest and Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation cannot be invoked which would block public interest for private benefit.

In Hira Tikkoo v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, (2004) 6 SCC 765 this Court held, Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation cannot be pressed into service where public interest is likely to suffer as against personal interest of a party.”

– Hon’ble Justice Prafulla C. Pant, State of Haryana v. Eros City Developers Pvt. Ltd., [Civil Appeal No. 354 of 2016].

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.