JUDGMENT

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.- A common question arises in these matters. Civil Appeal No. 1635 of 1987 is preferred against the judgment of Allahabad High Court allowing Writ Petition (C) No. 914 of 1986 filed by the Union of India. Civil Appeal No. 5021 of 1989 is preferred against the judgment of the same High Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 2858 of 1987 (filed by the Northern Railway City Booking Agency and another) allowing the writ petition following the judgment in Writ Petition (C) No. 914 of 1986. The writ petitions were filed later saying that they raise the very point involved in Civil Appeal No. 1635 of 1987. The matter arises under the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act. It would be enough if we refer to the facts in Civil Appeal No. 1635 of 1987 and indicate how the common question of law arises.

2. Writ Petition (C) No. 914 of 1986 was filed by (1) Union of India through General Manager, Northern Railway and (2) City Booking Agency, Bhoosa Toli, Kanpur, represented by M/s Komal Prasad Ashok Kumar. The respondents to the writ petition were the sales tax officials of Uttar Pradesh in addition to State of Uttar Pradesh. The Union of India asked for quashing the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Kanpur dated 20-8-1985 dismissing an application filed by the Union of India represented by the railway officials for release of the goods seized by the sales tax officials. A further direction in the nature of mandamus was also asked directing the sales tax authorities to release the goods seized (twenty-six packages of utensils). The High Court allowed the writ petition.

3. On 17-7-1985 at about 5.10 p.m. twenty-six packages of utensiJs were being transported in a thela (hand cart) drawn by one Matloob Ahmad and others. They were being transported from the parcel godown situated at Platform No. 1 of Kanpur Central Railway Station. The thela was checked by the Sales Tax Officer (mobile unit) at the Station Road, near the police station, Rail Bazar on the trijunction. The Officer found that the goods being transportedwere not accompanied by the requisite documents. It was claimed by persons accompanying the goods that they were transporting the said goods to the City Booking Agency at Bhoosa Toli. Accordingly, a show-cause notice was issued to the said City Booking Agency. On the next day, i.e., 18-7-1985, Shri Komal Prasad, who holds the contract of the City Booking Agency, Bhoosa Toli appeared in person but he did not submit any reply to the show-cause notice. Accordingly, the Officer submitted a seizure report on 19-7-1985 to the Deputy Commissioner. In the said report, the Officer stated that on 18-7-1985, he found on verification at the octroi post maintained by the Municipal Corporation, Kanpur situated near platform No. 1 in the Rail Bazar area of Kanpur Central Railway Station that the octroi with respect to said goods was deposited by one Raj Kumar under Receipt No. 9953 of 1977 dated 17-7-1985 at 5.10 p.m. in a sum of Rs 308.25p and that the payment of octroi by Shri Raj Kumar established that the said goods had been delivered to the said Raj Kumar at the Railway Station itself and further that the story of said goods being transported from the Railway Parcel Godown to Bhoosa Toli City Booking Agency of the Railways could not be true. The report stated further that if the story of transport from the railway godown to the City Booking Agency had been true, there was no occasion or necessity for paying the octroi and that too by a stranger. On the basis of the said report, proceedings were taken by the Deputy Commissioner (SIB), Sales Tax, Central Zone, Kanpur under Section 13-A(6) of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act. It is in these proceedings that the railway officials appeared and applied for release of goods contending that inasmuch as the goods were being transported from railway godown to the City Booking Agency, Bhoosa Toli, which according to them was indeed a part and parcel of the Railway as defined in the