An oral promise or a departmental note issued by a minister need not necessarily become a legally enforceable right, the Supreme Court has ruled.“When the view of several departments were involved the question of any oral view being expressed by a minister is really not relevant,” a bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and P Sathasivam, observed in a judgement, while upholding an appeal filed by the Arunachal Pradesh Government.The State had filed the appeal against a Guwahati High Court order which directed the Government to honour a “promise” made by the Law Minister in 1997 to a law publication Nezone Law House, Assam, for purchase of law journals.The publication house had claimed that it had printed 500 sets of “North Eastern Regional Local Acts and Rules” worth Rs one crore on the assurance of the minister who according to it promised to procure the same for supplying it to the State Law officers.The minister had also forwarded a departmental note to the ministries concerned for procuring the said material, the publication house claimed.However, the State Government took the plea that the minister had only expressed his desire for procuring 400 copies of one book relating to the said Act.It alleged that the publishers had interpolated the departmental note with the word “sets” and filed the petition in the High Court which directed the Government to honour the promise.The apex court after perusing the relevant records said the documents relied upon by the publication house refer only to some oral expression of desire by the then law minister.
