ORDER

Before the High Court [Union of India v. State of Punjab [1974] 34 STC 394 (P&H)], the following two questions came up for consideration :

"1. Whether the petitioner is a 'dealer' within the meaning of section 2(d) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and is liable to pay sales tax on its sales turnover ?

2. Whether, in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, no sales tax can be levied in view of the provisions of article 285 of the Constitution ?"

The first question according to the High Court was concluded by the view taken by this Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Thirumagal Mills Ltd. [1972] 29 STC 290; AIR 1972 SC 1148, and in State of Andhra Pradesh v. H. Abdul Bakshi and Brothers [1964] 15 STC 644; AIR 1965 SC 531. This aspect of the matter has not been seriously disputed and indeed cannot be dispute. On the second question, there remains little for consideration. There is no dispute that the Union of India is the owner of the Northern Railway Departmental Catering, Railway Station, Pathankot. The goods were purchased by the railways and were sold by the railways. The tax was imposed on the sale of goods. At the time of the sale, the goods belonged to the R