Statutory revision cannot decide vires challenges; writ jurisdiction remains available to test constitutional validity.

Authorities exercising jurisdiction under the U.P. Sales Tax Act cannot examine the constitutional validity of section 4-A(3), because vires questions lie outside statutory revision and remain fit for judicial review under article 226. Where a writ petition raises a challenge to the validity of a statutory provision, the existence of revision under the Act does not bar High Court scrutiny. The refusal to entertain the writ on that basis was erroneous, and the matter was remitted for disposal in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the constitutional validity of section 4-A(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 could be examined in revision proceedings under the Act, and whether the writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India was wrongly declined on the ground of availability of such revision.

Analysis: The jurisdiction of the authorities constituted under the Act, including the revisional court, is confined to matters arising under the statute and does not extend to adjudicating the vires of the statute itself. A question that a statutory provision is ultra vires is outside the scope of such proceedings. The remedy of judicial review under article 226 remains available for testing constitutional validity, and the High Court was not right in insisting that the appellants pursue revision proceedings for that purpose.

Conclusion: The refusal to entertain the writ petition on the ground that the vires issue could be raised in revision was erroneous, and the matter was remitted to the High Court for disposal in accordance with law.

---