https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78437 The Court dismissed the petition under Article 226 seeking direction for original records and award reward. The petitioner's claim based on promissory estoppel doctrine was rejected due to lack of clarity in information provided and absence of a clear promise by Respondent authorities. The Court emphasized that reward determination is at the discretion of department authorities, and no vested rights exist until an award is granted following established guidelines. As the petitioner failed to demonstrate specific reward policies or support for the claim, the Court found no merit in the petition and discharged the rule without costs. en-us Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:34:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78437 The Court dismissed the petition under Article 226 seeking direction for original records and award reward. The petitioner's claim based on promissory estoppel doctrine was rejected due to lack of clarity in information provided and absence of a clear promise by Respondent authorities. The Court emphasized that reward determination is at the discretion of department authorities, and no vested rights exist until an award is granted following established guidelines. As the petitioner failed to demonstrate specific reward policies or support for the claim, the Court found no merit in the petition and discharged the rule without costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78437