JUDGMENT

V. Bhargava, J. - These five petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution were heard together today. One of them was presented day before yesterday and the remaining four were presented today. All these five petitions were heard together as learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the important questions arising in all these petitions were identical.

2. All these five petitions have been presented by petitioners who challenge the validity of notifications dated 31-3-1956, issued in respect of goods in which these petitioners are dealing. Those notifications were purported to be issued by the State Government in exercise of their power u/s 3A (2) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, as amended by the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1956. The U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1956, in accordance with the provisions contained in it, came into force on 1-4-1956.

That Ordinance was replaced by the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1956. After that Act had been passed, the validity of those notifications was challenged in certain writ petitions before this Court and the Court held that the notifications of 31-3-1956, were void. Thereafter the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1957 was passed inter alia with the object of giving effect to the amended Section 3A retrospectively with effect from 31-3-1956. The object was to validate those notifications of 31-3-1956. After that Act was passed, a writ petition was filed in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution which was heard by a Full Bench of this Court.

The decision of the Full Bench of this Court is reported in Firm Bangali Mal Satish Chandra Jain Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Agra, AIR 1958 All 478 The Full Bench in that case held that the effect of the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1957, no doubt, was that Section 3A (2) of the U. P. Sales Tax, 1948, was to be deemed to be in force on 31-3-1956, in the form in which it was introduced by the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1956, as replaced by the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1956.

The Full Bench came to the view that, since the new Section 3A (2) was deemed to exist on 31-3-1956, in the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the power of the State Government to issue a notification of the nature which was issued, did exist on that date; but it further held that the notification was never purported to be issued in exercise of that power and, consequently, the notification was not valid. It was held by the Full Bench that a reading of the notification itself made it clear that it was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, as amended from time to time and on the date when the notification in question was issued, Section 3A (2), which was in force, was the old Section without containing in it the amendments which were subsequently introduced by the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1956, or the U. P. Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1956.

It was further held that the fact that, in view of the retrospective operation of the 1957 Act, the State Government must be deemed to have requisite power under the new Section 3A (2). on 31-3-1956, will not convert a notification issued under the old Section 3A (2) into one issued under the new section. The notification itself not being under the new section, it was held that the retrospective conferment of the necessary power could not validate that notification which was not issued in exercise of that power.

That notification was, therefore, declared void again by the Fall Bench. After that decision by the Full Bench, the U. P, Legislature has now passed the U. P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958, which came into force on 6-5-1958, Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of this Act, with which we are concerned is as follows:

"3 (1) Notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court, the notification specified in Part A, Part B and Part C of the Schedule shall be deemed to have been issued in exercise o the powers conferred r