OAK, C. J. : This reference to a Full Bench arises out of a writ petition filed by a former railway employee. Om Prakash was an employee of Northern Railway. On 6-3-1961 he was removed from service by the Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway, Lucknow. Om Prakash filed in this Court in March, 1961 the writ petition challenging the order of removal. He also filed an appeal to the Chief Mechanical Engineer, Northern Railway, New Delhi against the order of removal. On 19-8-1961 the Divisional Superintendent, Lucknow informed the petitioner that the appeal had been dismissed by the Chief Mechanical Engineer, Northern Railway, New Delhi.

2. The petitioner applied to this Court for permission to implead the Chief Mechanical Engineer, Northern Railway, New Delhi and the Union of India as respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in the writ petition. Amendment was allowed on 3-7-1967.

3. Mr. Jagdish Swarup appearing for the respondents urged before a single Judge of this Court that the writ petition is not maintainable. Mr. Jagdish Swarup contended that the order of removal dated 6-3-1961 has merged in the appellate order of the Chief Mechanical Engineer. It was pointed out that the office of the Chief Mechanical Engineer is at New Delhi. The office is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Allahabad High Court. Mr. Jagdish Swarup, therefore, contended that the writ petition was bound to fail. The petitioner relied on clause (1-A) of Article 226 of the Constitution. It was urged for the petitioner that since a part of the cause of action arose within Uttar Pradesh, this Court has jurisdiction. The respondents pointed out that clause (1-A) was inserted in Article 226 of the Constitution by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963, which came into force in October, 1963. The appellate order was passed by the Chief Mechanical Engineer in 1961- before the amendment came into force.

It was contended for the respondents that the amendment of Article 226 in 1963 cannot have retrospective effect. Consequently, this Court has no power to interfere with the appellate order passed by the Chief Mechanical Engineer in the year 1961. The learned single Judge considered that the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents presented much difficulty. He, therefore, referred the following question of law to a larger Bench :-

"Whether the Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution which came into force in October, 1963, empowers this Court to interfere with orders passed before the amendment?"

4. When the case came up before a Division Bench, the learned Judges noticed that there was a conflict of views among High Courts as to whether the amendment of Article 226 in the year 1963 can have retrospective operation. They, therefore, referred the question of law to a Full Bench.

5. Clause (1) of Article 226 of the Constitution states :-

"Notwithstanding anything in Article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose."

Under Clause (1), a High Court could only deal with matters within its territorial jurisdiction.

6. Clause (1-A) was inserted in Article 226 by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963, which came into force on 5-10-1963, Clause (1-A) of Article 226 states :-

"The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the res