SARDAR ALI KHAN, J.

( 1 ) IN these batch of writ petitions certain common questions of fact and law arise. However, the facts of each case are at variance to a certain extent which deserve to be mentioned in brief separately. The preponderance of facts and law as given in Writ Petition No. 5560 of 1984 is applicable to the rest of the Writ Petitions Nos. 6460, 14063, 14086, 6623 and 14069 of 1984. Therefore, it is proposed to deal first with the factual aspects of W. P. No. 5560 of 1984 and then with the facts of the other writ petitions also to the extent it is necessary for the determination of the disputes raised in these writ petitions.

( 2 ) W. P. No. 5560 of 1984 : In W. P. No. 5560 of 1984 the salient facts are as follows : The petitioner is the Transport Corporation of India Limited which is a public limited company engaged in the business of goods transport as a public carrier within the meaning of the Carriers Act of 1865. The petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to call for the records relating to notice Rc. No. B3/62/84 dated 9/03/1984 issued by the second respondent herein, i. e. , the Commercial Tax Officer, Lad Bazar Circle, Hyderabad, and to quash the same. The case put forward by the petitioner-corporation is that it is having a long standing in the business of transport for over 25 years. It has a network of offices throughout the country and operates large fleet of goods transport vehicles. The petitioner-corporation receives consignments from various parties for purposes of transport from one place to another in the country and in the course of their business they receive goods from respondents Nos. 4 to 9 herein, who are reputed tyre manufacturers for transportation of their material to different places in India.

( 3 ) SILVAASA is a Union territory forming part of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and is located on the coast of Gujarat. There has been no incidence of sales tax on a variety of goods in this Union territory including truck tyres and accessories. The respondents Nos. 4 to 9 who are tyre companies, have got their manufacturing units a various places in India, but taking advantage of the tax haven in Silvaasa they are moving their goods to Silvaasa and from there they have been despatching the goods to various States. This is apparently done with a view to avoid tax liability, which would otherwise have to be incurred in case the goods are despatched from some other place apart from Silvaasa. A brief resume of the procedure adopted for booking is also relevant to be mentioned here. It is alleged that tyre companies tender their goods to the petitioners office at Silvaasa for despatch to various destinations in the country. At the time of tendering of goods the petitioner-corporation issues a consignment note in five copies. The first and fourth copies are given to the consignor. The second copy is despatched along with the vehicle to be shown at the check posts, if so required. The third copy is despatched to the head office of the tyre company at Silvaasa. The last and the 5th copy is retained at the office at Silvaasa. Thereafter the goods are loaded into the trucks of the petitioner-corporation and despatched to the respective destinations. At the destination the goods are delivered to the consignees or to the persons to whom the consignment notes are endorsed. It seems no copy of the consignment note is forwarded to the consignees in advance. The consignments are booked in two broad categories, viz. , (1) consignments on self basis, and (2) consignments to a particular consignee at the destination. In the method adopted for consignment on self basis, the consignment note is issued by the consignor who negotiates the same through a bank. On discharge of the consignment note from the bank it is tendered to the petitioner-corporation at the point of delivery on payment of freight charges which are indicated in the consignment notes. The consignment note is