Mehrotra, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari calling for the record of the case and to quash the orders of the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax dated 21st of February 1955 passed on an application made by the petitioner in the Sales Tax Appeal of M/s Virendra Kumar Ravindra Kumar Khandsari, Shahjahanpur, and one revision against the order of Sri B. R. Verma the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Lucknow, dated 25th of August, 1955 in Radhey Shayam Tondon, Shahjahanpur v. The Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax, Lucknow Range, Lucknow, dated 5th of November, 1955; and further a writ of mandamus commanding the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax, Lucknow Range, and the Judge (Revisions) U. P., Lucknow, to permit the petitioner to appear and plead in appeals and revisions pending before them in which the petitioner has filed a special power of attorney executed by the dealers in his favour authorising him to act and plead in these cases.
(2.) The facts set out by the petitioner in his affidavit are that since 1948 the petitioner has been working as a recognised agent of various dealers in sales tax cases in the district of Shahjahanpur and in his capacity as agent he used to represent those dealers as their special agent appointed under special power of attorney in sales tax cases before the Sales Tax Officer, Judge (Appeals) and the Judge (Revisions). Ho used to prepare drafts of appeals and present petitions, memorandum of appeals and revisions. He was thus both acting and pleading for the dealers under the special power of attorney obtained from them. Thus he started to be regularly engaged in sales tax cases and this work was a source of livelihood to him. In 1951-52 the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax, Lucknow Range, raised an objection to the appearance of the petitioner before him. The Sales Tax authorities prohibited him from acting and pleading in view of the provisions of Rules 68(4) and 69 of the Sales Tax Rules. Thereupon in 1951 he made an application before the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax. On 3rd of December 1951 a communication was sent from the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax to the petitioner that an appeal could be signed and presented by a duly authorised agent but it could not be argued by him before the Judge (Appeals) or the Judge (Revisions). Thereupon the petitioner filed a writ petition In this Court which was numbered 41 of 1952, and which was rejected by this Court on the 11th of August, 1952. Even after the judgment of this Court, it is stated by the petitioner, that the petitioner was permitted by the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax, Lucknow Range, to plead and act as an authorised agent in cases where he filed special power of attorney. On the 21st of February 1955 when the petitioner intended to argue the appeals of one M/S Virendra Kumar Khandsari of Shahjahanpur the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax informed the petitioner that he had received instructions from the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax to prohibit the petitioner from appearing and arguing in Sales tax appeals pending before him. Thereafter an application was made by him before the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax stating that he was authorised, as he held a special power of attorney, to argue the appeals before him. This application was rejected on the 21st of February 1955. Thereafter the petitioner took up the matter with the Sales Tax authorities and moved an application before the Sales Tax Commissioner complaining against the above order. The Sales Tax Commissioner directed the matter to be placed before the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax as it involved a reversal of the Order of the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax. Thereafter the petitioner approached the Assistant Secretary, Finance Department, who expressed his inability to do anything in the matter and suggested that in case the petitioner wanted any redress he could approach the Hon'ble Minister for Finance. Therefore the petitioner filed a petition before the Hon'ble Finance Minister on the 23rd of February 1955. The Hon'ble Minister referred the matter for disposal to Sri Bharat Narain, Deputy Secretary. As the petitioner had, however received no reply to his application to the Finance Secretary he again moved the Hon'ble Minister on the 5th of April 1955 and again on the 18th April 1955. After that the petitioner consulted Sri B. N. Roy, an advocate of Lucknow, who suggested that the petitioner may be able to get relief by making an application under Section 11 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act before the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax. On the 13th of August 1955 an application was filed before the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Lucknow, under the advice of Sri B. N. Roy Advocate. By his order dated the 25th of August 1955 the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax held that the petitioner had been given no right under Rules 77-A and 77-B of the U. P. Sales Tax Rules to do anything apart from acting on behalf of a dealer and thus upheld the order passed by the Judge (Appeals). The order was sent to the petitioner on the 30th of September 1955 and was received by him in the first week of October 1955. After that the petitioner again approached the Government of Uttar Pradesh and in this connection met Sri Bharat Narain, Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, who gave him to understand that the matter was being considered by the U. P. Government and the petitioner meanwhile again applied to the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax Lucknow Range, that he be permitted to appear and plead in appeals before him; but the application was rejected by an order of the 5th of November 1955. AS no decision, however, was given by the State Government the petitioner came to Allahabad in February 1956 to take legal advice and after consulting his counsel left certain papers with him. But as the petitioner could not manage to file an application earlier he received the draft petition prepared by the counsel on the 22nd March 1956 and the petitioner then filed the present petition to this Court on the llth of May 1956.
(3.) The petitioner has claimed two reliefs: firstly, a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax rejecting his petition to appear in the appeals filed by Messrs. Virendra Kumar Ravindra Kumar Khandsari, Shahj ahanpur, and, secondly, a writ of mandamus commanding the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax to permit the petitioner to appear and plead in all appeals and revisions pending before him in which he had filed a special power of attorney from the assessee.;