( 1 ) BY filing this Special Civil Application, the petitioner has challenged issuance of notice dated 20th December, 2000, Annexure : B to the petition, conveying the petitioner that the Commissioner is seeking to exercise revisional jurisdiction.

( 2 ) SHORT facts briefly required to be narrated are as under. The petitioner is engaged in manufacture of pesticides since 1997 at Panoli, District - Bharuch. An application for eligibility certificate was given to the Industries Commissioner as required by the Sales Tax Incentive Scheme (1995-2000 ). The said application was granted on 23. 2. 1998 for Sales Tax Incentive. Ad hoc eligibility certificate for Rs. 717 lacs was issued on 23. 4. 99. Thereafter, Additional Industries Commissioner issued final eligibility certificate for Rs. 2300. 28 lacs on 29. 4. 2000.

( 3 ) IN between the petitioner made an application on 10. 5. 98 to the Commissioner for determination of disputed questions as provided by Section 62 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act" ). Under Section 27 of the Act, for carrying out the purpose of the Act, the State Government appointed an officer who is known as Commissioner of Sales Tax. To assist him in execution of his functions, the State Government is authorized to appoint Special Commissioners of Sales Tax, Additional Commissioners of Sales Tax, Deputy Commissioners of Sales Tax, Assistant Commissioners of Sales Tax, officers and other officers and persons. So far as the jurisdiction is concerned, under section 27 (3) of the Act, the Commissioner shall have jurisdiction over the whole of the State of Gujarat. The Commissioner is a person exercising all the powers and is performing all the duties conferred or imposed on him by or under the Act. So far as the present case is concerned, sub-section (5) of section 27 being relevant is reproduced hereunder. "27 (5): a Deputy Commissioner shall have and exercise in the area within his jurisdiction all the powers, and shall perform all the duties, conferred or imposed on the Commissioner, by or under this Act; but the Commissioner may, by order published in the Official Gazette, direct that any Deputy Commissioner, or all Deputy Commissioners generally, shall not exercise such powers or perform such duties as are specified in the order, and there-upon such Deputy Commissioner or, as the case may be, all Deputy Commissioner, shall cease to exercise those powers and perform those duties. The Commissioner may in like manner revoke any such direction and there-upon the powers or duties exercisable or performable by such Deputy Commissioner, or duties exercisable or performable by such Deputy Commissioner, or as the case may be, all Deputy Commissioners before such direction was issued, shall be restored to him or them. "

( 4 ) IN the instant case, the Commissioner delegated powers to the Deputy Commissioner (Legal) and therefore the application which was made under section 62 of the Act was required to be dealt with by Deputy Commissioner (Legal ). It is specifically averred in the petition that the Deputy Commissioner forwards a note containing his proposed decision to the Commissioner for his approval and after receiving such approval, the Deputy Commissioner (Legal) would pass appropriate order in consonance with the approval given by the Commissioner. In the instant case, similar procedure was followed and after receiving an approval, order was made on 18. 7. 98 deciding the disputed questions which were referred to in the application, copy of which is annexed at Annexure :a. Deputy Commissioner (Legal) while answering the questions has considered the matter in detail which has got the approval of the Commissioner. Mr. Kazi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner - assessee has raised a question that once the Commissioner who has approved the order which has been made by the Deputy Commissioner (Legal), he cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction. As agains