JUDGMENT H. L. AGRAWAL, C.J. and S. C. MOHAPATRA, J. - This is a batch of five writ applications which have been taken up together for convenience with consent of the learned counsel for the parties, as they involve the same facts and point of law. They are disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners in all these writ applications have been engaged in timber business and in course thereof took forest coupes either in the name of any partner or in the name of the partnership firm. They filed the present writ applications challenging the validity, legality and applicability of explanation II of section 2(c) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act as amended and validated by the Orissa Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 1979, denying exigibility of sales tax on all the transactions and business carried on by them. 3. During the pendency of all these writ applications in this Court, a similar matter was carried to the Supreme Court and the decision of the Supreme Court has been reported in [1985] 60 STC 213; AIR 1985 SC 1293 (State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Company Limited). It has been held by their Lordships : "The result is that sales of dressed or sized logs by the respondent-firm having already been assessed to sales tax, the sales to the first respondent-firm of timber by the State Government from which logs were made by the respondent-firm cannot be made liable to sales tax as it would amount to levying tax at two points in the same series of sales by successive dealers, assuming without deciding that the retrospectively substituted definition of 'dealer' in clause (c) of section 2 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, is valid." Following the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, we have only yesterday disposed of another batch of five writ applications being O.J.C. Nos. 391, 827, 828, 829 and 830 of 1980 and given a direction to the respective Divisional Forest Officers to determine the liability of the petitioners afresh in accordance with the terms and observations made by the Supreme Court as quoted above. 4. The impugned demand notices in all the present writ applications except O.J.C. No. 869 of 1980 are annexure 3 series and annexure 4 series in O.J.C. No. 869 of 1980. 4. The impugned demand notices in all the present writ applications except O.J.C. No. 869 of 1980 are annexure 3 series and annexure 4 series in O.J.C. No. 869 of 1980. Since the demands are to be re-examined, we direct the respective Divisional Forest Officers to determine the liability of the petitioners afresh under the provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court referred to above, viz., as to whether any fresh demand is exigible or not so far as the petitioners are concerned and thereafter take such steps as may be available under law. Till the matter is re-examined, all the demand notices in question shall remain in abeyance. 5. All the writ applications are accordingly disposed of, but without any order as to costs. Writ applications disposed of accordingly.