G.S.CHAHAL, J. - (1.) SINCE common question of law is involved herein, the judgment will dispose of the present writ petition and Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 1026, 1120, 1123, 1244, 1338, 1396, 1553, 2204, 2292, 2794, 2795, 3449, 3480, 3573, 3574, 3580, 3631, 3644, 3681, 3756, 3921, 3924, 3925, 4146, 4213, 4375, 4753, 4987, 5216, 5285, 5513, 6802, 7265, 7524, 10125 and 10335 of 1988 and 1784 and 2708 of 1989 relating to tiny industries and khadi udyog in the State of Haryana. With respect to tiny industries, we will refer to the facts contained in Writ Petition No. 757 of 1988. The petitioners have challenged the validity of Notification dated 30th December, 1987, annexure P1. According to the facts mentioned, the Governor of Haryana, in exercise of his powers under section 13 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), issued Notification dated 2nd June, 1979, annexure P2, whereby all rural tiny industrial units, set up on or after the date of publication of this notification, whose capital investment on machinery and equipment did not exceed Rs. 1,00,000 were exempted from payment of tax under the Act, subject to their obtaining certificate of genuineness issued by the Industries Department, Haryana, and the exemption was for a period of two years. The grant of this benefit for development of rural industries was given wide publicity through the Government media. It was to promote rural economy and employment opportunities for the ruralists. Influenced by the said policy of grant of incentives in the shape of exemption of taxes, the petitioners installed rural tiny industrial units in village Chandi and Madina in district Rohtak for the manufacture and delinting of cotton seed. On applications made by the petitioner, exemption certificate was issued in their favour in terms of the notification. The petitioners gave the following details of the dates on which they were granted exemption certificates : S. Name of petitioner Date w. e. f. exemption No. certificate granted 1. Amar General Mills, Chandi 11-11-1987 2. Ankur Cotton Steed and Oil Industries, 25-9-1987 Mauja Kuntana 3. Diamond Delinter Industries, Madina 3-4-1987 2 The certificate of exemption was initially for a period of one year, but was extendible for another year in conformity with the exemption notification annexure P2. 3 The Governor of Haryana issued a fresh notification dated 30th December, 1987, annexure P1, superseding all the previous notifications, including exemption Notification dated 2nd June, 1979, annexure P2, and thereby provided that the units of the type covered by annexure P2, are entitled to the exemption of only up to the turnover of Rs. 5,00,000 and that the exemption already granted shall be deemed to be modified in terms of the new notification. The following clause in the impugned notification has adversely affected the rights of the petitioners : ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3) Such units shall be entitled to exemption on the turnover not exceeding rupees five lakhs in a year.
(2.) IN case of those units in whose favour the exemption certificates have already been granted by the Assessing Authorities, such exemption certificates shall be deemed to have been modified in accordance with the terms of this notification as if such certificates were issued under this notification. " The turnover of Rs. 5 lacs is attained by the petitioners' units every month, but since the units installed have the capacity of producing 6 tonnes of cotton seeds every day this target is also required to be achieved in order to make the units economically viable, as prescribed by the banks and various institutions, including the Haryana Financial Corporation. The impugned notification, as in force, will give exemption to the petitioners only for one month in a year. The respondent-authorities contested the writ petitions by way of filing written statements. The facts were not disputed, but it was pleaded that there could be no rule of estoppel against a statute and there could be no restriction placed on the powers of the State Government of collect the tax. The exemption was in the form of concession and it could be withdrawn without violating the rule of promissory estoppel. In C. W. P. 3644 of 1988 the petitioners have pleaded that they were khadi and village industries and that they had been exempted from payment of fax for the promotion of the same. This exemption was claimed under Notification dated 10th August, 1973, annexure P2, and the tax exemption was allowed. Under the impugned notification dated 30th December, 1987, the previous notification was superseded and it was provided as follows : ". . . . . . . . . . . the Governor of Haryana, being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, in the interest of cottage industries hereby exempts with effect from 1st day of January, 1988, - (a) all classes of co-operative societies and persons, excepting the Khadi Ashram, Panipat, and its decentralised units functioning within the State of Haryana, the co-operative societies and person running brick-kilns or hydraulic sulphur sugar plants, so long as their turnover does not exceed rupees five lakhs in a year; (b) the co-operative societies and persons, running brick-kilns or hydraulic sulphur sugar plants, so long as their turnover remains below seventy-five thousand rupees in a year; and (c) the Khadi Ashram, Panipat, and its decentralised units functioning within the State of Haryana, in whose case there is no maximum limit of turnover in a year;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " These petitions have also been contested by the respondents on similar grounds as those of the tiny industries. The validity of the Notification dated 30th December, 1987, annexure P1, which became effective from 1st January, 1988, was considered by a single Judge in Satgur Oil Mills v. State of Haryana [1989] 73 STC 341 (P and H); ILR (1989) 1 P and H 175, and while allowing the writ petition, it was held that the Notification dated 30th December, 1987, did not apply to the industrial units of the petitioners and they would be entitled to two years exemption from payment of tax on the basis of the exemption certificate in their favour issued by the Assessing Authority. In view of certain observations made in the Supreme Court judgment, Bharat General and Textile Industries Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra [1989] 72 STC 354; (1988) III SVLR (T) 120; JT (1988) 4 SC 204, the writ petitions were referred to a larger Bench and that is how, these writ petitions have come up before us. In the exemption Notification dated 2nd June, 1979, annexure P2, the Governor of Haryana, while granting the exemption, had, inter alia, directed : ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, in the interest of rural industries, hereby exempts all rural tiny industrial units, set up on or after the date of publication of this notification, in the official Gazette, whose capital investment on machinery and equipment does not exceed rupees one lac and in whose favour certificate of genuineness is issued by the Industries Department of the Haryana State, from the payment of tax under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973, on the purchase or sale of any goods. . . . . . . . . . " This exemption was subject to two conditions : " 1. An exemption certificate in the form annexed to this notification is obtained by them from the Assessing Authority of the district concerned, on an application made to such authority in this behalf; The exemption shall be for a period of two years from the date of issue of the exemption certificate. " Vide Notification dated 30th December, 1987, annexure P1, the Governor of Haryana issued the notification in the following terms : ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, in the interest of rural industries hereby exempts, with effect from the first of January, 1988, all rural tiny industrial units, set up on or after the 22nd June, 1979, whose capital investment on machinery and equipment, does not exceed rupees one lakh and in whose favour certificates of genuineness is issued by the Industries Department of Haryana State, from the payment of tax under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973,. . . . . . . . . . . "
(3.) THE further conditions for availing of the concession were to obtain an exemption certificate; the exemption was for two years and the exemption was on the turnover not exceeding Rs. 5,00,000 in a year. The validity of this notification has been challenged on the basis that the petitioners having acted upon the promise made in annexure P2, the State Government was bound by the rule of promissory estoppel and the period of exemption could not be curtailed, nor could the restriction over the total turnover be fixed. The impugned notification also has retrospective effect and it virtually amounted to withdrawal of all concessions.;