S. K. Seth, J.- 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges rule 8 (1-A) (f) of the M. P. Sales Tax (Central) Rules, 1957 to be ultra vires the rule making power conferred on the State Government by the Central Sales fax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as, Central Act).

2. We may first briefly set out the facts giving rise to the pre5ent petition. The petitioners, M/s Dawar Brothers, was a registered partnership firm. It carried on business in Madhya Pradesh as a motor dealer at Bhopal and Jabalpur. It also carried on business as dealers in spare parts, tractors, motorcycles and accessories and as suppliers of Indance Gas for domestic consumption. In the course of its business as dealers, the petitioner made sale, to the Government and other parties within the State of Madhya Pradesh. The sales tax was assessed on such sales in accordance with the provisions of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'State Act'). Orders for assessment for the assessment years 1969-76 were made by the assessing authorities under the State Act during the period from 18-12-75 to 13-7-71 and a total sales tax liability of Rs. 16,70,425 together with penalty of Rs. 49,87,020 was determined against the petitioner under the said orders. According to the petitioner, as it found it difficult to prefer appeals against the above said orders due to its incapacity to deposit the prescribed proportion of the tax assessed, it had to remain content with making applications to the Commissioner under section 39 of the State Act for revision of the assessments in question and grant of necessary reliefs. The petitioner also, in the meantime, approached the State Government for grant of facility for payment of the amount in question in instalments on the basis of the estimated aggregated liability. The State Government made an order on 29-10-76 (Annexure-A) granting the facility of payment of the amount in question in instalments subject to certain conditions stated in the said order. However, as according to the State Government, there were defaults committed by the petitioner of the abovesaid conditions the State Government, vide its order dated 2-8-77, addressed to the Commissioner, revoked the abovesaid order dated 29-10-76. The copy or the said revocation order was sent to the petitioner also.

3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was greatly aggrieved not only by the abovesaid orders of assessment of sales tax and levy of penalty but also by the abovesaid order of revocation of the facility of payment in instalments. However, at the time of final hearing of the present petition, it was stated on behalf of the petitioner that on account of the pendency of various proceedings before the various departmental authorities, the petitioner did not want to press its challenge in respect of the abovesaid matters and wanted to confine its challenge only to the matters covered by sub-clauses 1, 2 and 6 of the prayer clause. It is accordingly that we are not required to decide anything in the present petition as regards the abovesaid orders or assessment of sales tax and levy of penalty or anything as regards the validity of the order of revocation of facility of payment in instalments.

4. The subject matter that survives for consideration in the present petition is only indirectly connected with the abovesaid facts. According to the petitioner, the abovesaid defaults in complying with the conditions of the order granting instalments had occurred mainly due to the failure of the sales tax authorities to issue declarat on forms in Form-C, as provided for and prescribed under section 8 of the Central Act read with rule 8 of the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax (Central) rules, 1957, for being furnished to the selling dealers and thus earning concessional rate of tax. According to the petitioner, on account of the non-issuance of the said C-Forms by the sales tax authorities to it, its business suffer