Promissory estoppel cannot enforce a tentative public-sale policy where no concluded contract or completed representation exists.

Tentative resolutions by a public authority did not create an enforceable right to transfer tenements where no concluded contract, fixed sale terms, demanded consideration, or completed conveyance process existed. The scheme was treated as enabling rather than mandatory, so the appellants could not compel sale on the basis of preliminary corporate decisions. Promissory estoppel also failed because no completed representation bound the Corporation and public interest outweighed private expectation, particularly where the undertaking was loss-making and needed to preserve accommodation for in-service workers. The Corporation was therefore entitled to withdraw from the proposed sale, and no legal right to transfer arose.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had acquired a legal right to transfer of the tenements on the basis of the resolutions passed by the Corporation, and whether the Corporation was bound by promissory estoppel to complete the transfer despite its subsequent decision not to proceed with the sale.

Analysis: The resolutions in question were only tentative and did not culminate in any concluded contract or enforceable commitment. No formal sale terms were fixed or communicated, no consideration was demanded, and no individual allotment or conveyance process was completed. The scheme was held to be enabling and not mandatory. The Court also held that public interest had to be weighed against individual expectation, especially because the Corporation was a loss-making public sector undertaking required to preserve accommodation for in-service workers. On these facts, the doctrine of promissory estoppel could not override the Corporation's decision to withdraw from the proposed sale.

Conclusion: The appellants had no enforceable legal right to compel transfer of the tenements, and promissory estoppel did not apply against the Corporation.

Final Conclusion: The decision affirms that a tentative policy resolution, unsupported by completed contractual steps, cannot be enforced against a public authority where larger public interest justifies withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi: Promissory estoppel cannot be invoked to enforce a tentative governmental or public-authority policy decision where no concluded contract or completed representation exists and where overriding public interest justifies withdrawal.

---