Nagendra Rai, J.

1. Both the cases involve the same question of law and as such, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The question which involve for determination in this case is as to whether a notification issued by the Government of Bihar dated 11.6.1996, which was published in the official Gazette on the same date revising the rate of duty on Indian Made Foreign Liquor (hereinafter referred to as IMFL) and bear, will come into force from the date of printing in the official Gazette or it will come into force from the date it was made available to the public or known to the persons having concerned with the same.

3. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 10969 of 1999 filed the present writ application challenging the order dated 1.9.1997 passed by the Superintendent of Excise, Hathidah Distillery, Hathidah, respondent No. 6, by which it has been directed to deposit Rs. 11,75,525.00 by way of difference between the duty prevailing between 11.6.1996 and 21.6.1996 as enhanced duty on IMFL/bear and the order dated 14.6.1999 passed by the Commissioner of Excise, Bihar dismissing the appeal against the said order and the order dated 4.10.1999 passed by the Board of Revenue dismissing the revision application against the said order. Copies of the said orders have been annexed as Annexures 3, 4 and 5 to the writ application respectively.

4. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 11183 of 1999 have challenged the order dated 17.7.1996 passed by the Superintendent of Excise, M/s U.B. Distilleries Ltd., Mirganj Distillery, Mirganj, Gopalganj, respondent No. 5, by which it has been directed to deposit Rs. 42,31,541.25 paise byway of difference between the duty prevailing between 11.6.1996 and 4.7.1996 as enhanced duty on IMFL/bear and the order dated 14.6.1999 passed by the Commissioner of Excise, Bihar in appeal and order dated 4.10.1999 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue. Copies of the said orders have been annexed as Annexures 10, 11 and 12 to the writ application respectively. It is to be stated that the appellate and the revisional Court disposed of both the petitions by a common order.

5. Both the petitioners are the companies registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, The petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 10969 of 1999 has its head office in Madras and its distillery is situated at Hathidah in the district of Patnaand the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 11183 of 1999 has its head office at Calcutta and its distillery is situated at Mirganj in the District of Gopalganj, Bihar. Both the companies are engaged in manufacturing of Whisky, Brandy, Gin, Rum, Vodka, etc. Both the petitioners hold licence under the provisions of the Bihar Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and they have been granted licence in Excise Forms No. 19, 19B, 19C, 20 and 28-Aprescribed by the Board of Revenue under Sec. 38 of the Act. The licence in Form No. 19 is issued for compounding and blending of IMFL. The licence in Form No. 19-B is granted to deposit or keep foreign liquor without payment of duty in a Warehouse established with the approval of the Excise Commissioner and Form 19-C is the licence for distribution of IMFL/Beer to the wholesale licensees and Army and military authorities and Form No. 20 is for bottling of potable IMFL. Sec. 27 of the Act empowers the State Government to impose duty on import, export, transport and manufacture on excisable articles. Sec. 28 of the Act provides ways of levying such duty and for the purpose of the present cases, relevant provision is 28(C)(ii) which provides that the excise duty imposed under Section 27 of the Act shall be levied by payment upon issue for sale from a warehouse established, authorised or continued under this Act. The first proviso of Sec. 28 provides that where payment is made upon the issue of an excisable article for sale from a warehouse, it shall be at the rate of duty in force on the date of issue of such article from such warehouse. Thus