D. M. CHANDRASHEKHAR, J. :- This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, had come up in the first instance, before a learned single Judge, K. C. Agarwal, J. The order of reference made by his Lordship reads thus:-

"The question raised by the learned counsel for the parties is, in my opinion, of general importance and is likely to arise in a number of other petitions, and as my judgment could not be a subject-matter of appeal to a Division Bench, it appears appropriate to refer this case to a larger Bench for deciding the following questions :

1. Whether the irrebuttable presumption incorporated in Explanations (ii) and (iv) of S. 21 is of substantive law or procedure expressed in presumptive form?

2. Whether S. 14 (2) of U. P. Act No. 28 of 1976 deleting Explanations (ii) and (iv) is retrospective in operation?

3. Whether the law, as amended by U. P. Act No. 28 of 1976, is to be given effect to in the present writ proceedings?

2. Under Cl. (b) of the proviso to R. 2 of Chapter V of the Rules of this High Court, a Judge may, if he thinks fit, refer a case which may be heard by a Judge sitting alone or any question of law arising therein for decision to a larger Bench.

3. A