S. R. NAYAK, J.

In these writ petitions, the constitutional validity of sub-rule (5-A) of rule 17 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 (for short, "the APGST Rules") as inserted by way of amendment vide G.O.Ms. No. 816, Revenue (CT.II), Department dated November 15, 2000 is assailed. The first petitioner in W.P. No. 20211 of 2001 is the Andhra Sales Tax Practitioners and Consultants Association whereas petitioners 2 and 3 are Sales Tax Practitioners. The petitioners, 23 in all in W.P. No. 20152 of 2001 are the traders and registered dealers under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the APGST Act").

The following are the material averments in the affidavit filed in support of Writ Petition No. 20211 of 2001 :

(i) Section 35 of the APGST Act provides that any person who is entitled to appear before any authority may be represented, inter alia, by a Sales Tax Practitioner who is duly authorised in writing in this behalf. Under the provisions of rule 63 of the APGST Rules, 1957, the procedure for registration of a Sales Tax Practitioner is specified. In order to be a qualified Sales Tax Practitioner, a person should possess a degree in commerce or law of any recognised university. Alternatively an accountant who has passed the accountancy examination conducted by the Central Board of Revenue constituted under the Central Board of Revenue Act, 1924 is also entitled to be registered as Sales Tax Practitioner. Rule 63(3) contemplates an application being made before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Andhra Pradesh and payment of fee of Rs. 50. Thereupon the Commissioner, if he is satisfied that the applicant possesses the requisite qualification, registers the applicant as Sales Tax Practitioner. Against the order of Commissioner of Commercial Taxes refusing to register a particular person, an appeal is provided to the Government Under rule 63-A of the Rules the person authorised under section 35 of the Act is to file an authorisation in form XXXVI. It may be noticed that form XXXVI does not make any difference as amongst the various classes of representatives, viz., Advocates, Chartered Accountants and the Sales Tax Practitioners or Accountants.

(ii) For a long number of years the Sales Tax Practitioners have been rendering service to the clientele all over the State. Their services have been unblemished and there never has been a compliant that there is any dereliction of duty on the part of the Sales Tax Practitioners as a class. There has been no complaint from any quarters about the capacity of the Sales Tax Practitioners to represent their clients before the authorities. As a matter of fact, Sales Tax Practitioners appear in appeals before the Appellate Deputy Commissioners and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and also in revision proceedings before the Joint Commissioner/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.

(iii) The Sales Tax Practitioners have assisted their clients in obtaining registration under the Act in preparing the periodic returns as contemplated under the Act, in filing the annual returns of turnover, in procuring the various forms from the department. The Sales Tax Practitioners have facilitated the process of assessment before the department. Even in the recent settlement scheme the Sales Tax Practitioners have assisted their clients in resolving the disputes with the Sales Tax Department.

(iv) All of a sudden the second respondent issued G.O.Ms. No. 816 dated November 15, 2000 inserting the provisions of sub-rule (5-A) in rule 17 of the Rules. It will be noticed that the sub-rule (5-A) comes into force with effect from the assessment year 2000-2001. The rule mandates that every dealer whose turnover exceeds Rs. 40 lakhs should get its accounts audited by a Chartered Accountant, and also furnish to the Assessing Officer a certificate of audit in Form XXXVI and a statement in Form XXXVII along with forms AR I, AR II, AR III and AR IV duly attested by the Chartered Accountan