T. SURYA RAO, J. ( 1 ) A reference has been made under Section 395 (2) of the Code of criminal Procedure by some of the Presiding officers of Special Tribunals constituted under the Indian Electricity (Andhra Pradesh amendment) Act 35 of 2000 for the decision of this Court as regards the cases instituted before the Special Tribunals. Four points have been formulated in this regard by the learned Judges while referring the matter, which may be extracted herein below thus: (1) Whether the Special Tribunals under the Indian Electricity Act can take cognizance of the offences directly; (2) Whether the Special Tribunals be directed to follow the Summary trial procedure prescribed under section 49-C (7) of the Act; (3) Whether the appeals pending with the district Judges which were filed prior to the amendment of the Act be directed to be disposed of by the respective Judges with whom the appeals are pending; and (4) Whether the cases transferred to the special Tribunals and the cases that are being instituted be treated as calendar Cases or Summary Trial cases. ( 2 ) IN order to achieve the twin objectives of having speedy trial of the cases involving theft of energy and to award a deterrent punishment to the offenders, the Indian Electricity (Andhra pradesh Amendment) Act 35 of 2000 ( the act for brevity) was passed by the State of andhra Pradesh. The said Act thus seeks to amend the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 in its application to the State of Andhra pradesh. The latter Act being a Central act, the Amendment Act had been reserved by the Governor of Andhra Pradesh for the consideration and assent of the president of India and the consideration having been received on 28-10-2000, eventually it was passed. The Act shall be deemed to have come into force with effect on and from 31-7-2000, the date on which the Ordinance was promulgated by the governor of Andhra Pradesh. Insofar as the State of Andhra Pradesh is concerned the provisions of the Indian Electricity act, 1910 as amended under the Act 35 of 2000 shall apply from 31-7-2000 onwards. ( 3 ) UNDER the State Amendment Act, Sections 49-B to 49-I have been incorporated into the Principal Act. A reconnaissance of the amended provisions need be made for brevity and better understanding of the matter. Section 49-B pertains to the compounding of offences. ( 3 ) UNDER the State Amendment Act, Sections 49-B to 49-I have been incorporated into the Principal Act. A reconnaissance of the amended provisions need be made for brevity and better understanding of the matter. Section 49-B pertains to the compounding of offences. Section 49-C, however, envisages constitution of Special tribunals. While Section 49-D envisages the constitution of Special Courts, Section 49-E deals with the procedure and powers. Section 49-F confers powers to the civil court and Court of Session and Section 49-G confers power of review upon the Special court. Section 49-H, however, mandates the deposit of compensation in any appeal preferred before the Special Court or in any proceeding before the High Court against the judgment or order of the Special tribunal or the Special Court respectively. Section 49-I confers the jurisdiction on the special Tribunal as well as the Special Court to decide any dispute relating to the correctness or otherwise of any matter. In this reference, inasmuch as the power to take cognizance of the cases by the Special tribunal and the procedure to be followed in regard thereto is in question, it is apt here to consider Section 49-C - the provision which is germane for consideration at the outset and the same may be extracted herein below thus:"49-C. Constitution of Special Tribunals : (1) For the purpose of providing for speedy trial, the State Government shall with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the high Court, by notification in the Official gazette, specify for a District or Districts, a court of District and Sessions Judge to be special Tribunal to try the offences under this Act and determine the compensation to be awarded to the Electricity Utility where the compensation to be awarded is upto the value of rupees five lakhs: provided that if, in the opinion of the special Tribunal any case brought before it is a fit case to be tried by the Special Court, it may, for reasons to be recorded by it, transfer the case to the Special Court for its decision in the matter. (2) An appeal shall lie from any judgment or order, not being interlocutory order, of the special Tribunal, to the Special Court. (2) An appeal shall lie from any judgment or order, not being interlocutory order, of the special Tribunal, to the Special Court. Every appeal under this sub-section shall be preferred within a period of sixty days from the date of judgment or order of the Special tribunal: provided that the Special Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of sixty days, if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of sixty days. (3) Every finding of the Special Tribunal with regard to any alleged act of theft of energy shall be conclusive proof of the fact of theft of energy and shall be binding on the person or consumer concerned. (4) It shall be lawful for the Special Court to pass an order in any case decided by it awarding compensation in terms of money for theft of energy which shall not be less than an amount equivalent to twelve months assessed quantity of the energy committed theft of at three times of tariff rate applicable to the consumer or person as per guidelines prescribed by State Government from time to time and the amount of compensation so awarded shall be recovered as if it were a decree of a civil Court: provided that the Special Tribunal shall, before passing an order under this sub-section, give to the consumer or person an opportunity of making his representation or of adducing evidence, if any, in this regard and consider every such representation and evidence. (5) Any case pending before any Court or other Authority immediately before the commencement of the Indian Electricity (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2000, as would have been within the jurisdiction of a special Tribunal shall stand transferred to the Special Tribunal, having jurisdiction as if the cause of action on which such suit or proceeding is based had arisen after such commencement. (6) Every case brought before the Special tribunal shall be disposed of finally by the special Tribunal, as far as possible, within a period of six months from the date of its having been brought before it. (6) Every case brought before the Special tribunal shall be disposed of finally by the special Tribunal, as far as possible, within a period of six months from the date of its having been brought before it. (7) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 260 or Section 262 of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under this Act, shall be tried in a summary way by the Special Tribunal and the provisions of Sections 263 to 265 of the said Code shall as far as may be apply to such trial. " (Emphasis is mine) ( 4 ) SUB-SECTION (1) of Section 49-C, as can be seen from the above excerpted provision, contemplates the specification of a Court of District and Sessions Judge in the District to be a Special Tribunal. The special Tribunal thus specified shall try the offences under the Act and determine the compensation to be awarded to the Electricity utility. The proviso incorporated thereunder enables the Special Tribunal to transfer any case brought before it to the Special Court for reasons to be recorded, if it is of the opinion that it is a fit case to be tried by the special Court. Sub-section (2) thereof confers a right of appeal as against the judgment or order of the Special Tribunal to the Special Court provided the same is not an interlocutory order. Sub-section (4) thereof empowers the Special Tribunal to award compensation and the same shall be recovered as if it were a decree of a civil court. Sub-section (5) thereof clearly envisages the transfer of pending cases before any Court or other authority immediately before the commencement of the amendment Act 35 of 2000 to the Special tribunal having jurisdiction, incorporating thereunder a deeming clause by fiction of law that the cause of action for the suit or proceeding had arisen after such commencement of the Amendment Act. Under this deeming clause, all suits and proceedings which are pending before various other fora shall automatically stand transferred to the Tribunal as if the causes of action on which those suits or proceedings are based, had arisen after such commencement of the Amendment Act, namely on or after 31-7-2000. ( 5 ) SUB-SECTION (7) thereof contemplates the procedure to be adopted in trying those cases by the Special Tribunals. ( 5 ) SUB-SECTION (7) thereof contemplates the procedure to be adopted in trying those cases by the Special Tribunals. This provision clearly ordains that every offence punishable under the Amendment Act shall be tried in a summary way by the special Tribunals and for that purpose the provisions of Sections 263 to 265 of the code of Criminal Procedure shall, as far as may be, apply to such trial. This power to try the cases in a summary way has been envisaged notwithstanding anything contained in Section 260 or Section 262 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. While section 260 of the Code clearly contemplates the power to try summarily certain categories of cases either by the Chief Judicial magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate or magistrate of First Class empowered specially for that purpose by the High Court, section 262 of the Code limits the power of the Court to impose sentence as specified therein. While following the summary procedure specified in the Code, obviously the limitation engrafted either under section 260 or Section 262 of the Code has no application to the Special Tribunals, which are expected to try the cases by following the summary procedure in accordance with the provisions contained in Sections 263 to 265 of Code. ( 6 ) NEEDLESS to say that pursuant to the provisions of the Amendment Act 35 of 2000 all the I Additional District and sessions Courts elsewhere in the State and the Courts of Chief Metropolitan Magistrates in the Metropolitan Areas have been specified as Special Tribunal under the Act. ( 7 ) APROPOS the constitution and power of the Special Courts, it is expedient to consider Sections 49-D, 49-E and 49-F of the Act and the same may be, insofar as they are relevant for the present purposes, extracted herein below thus:"49-D. Constitution of Special Court : (1) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a Special Court for the purpose of providing speedy enquiry into any alleged act of theft of energy and trial of cases and for awarding compensation to the Electricity utility. (2) xxxxxxxxx (3) xxxxxxxxx (4) xxxxxxxxx (5) (a) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the jurisdiction powers and authority of the Special Court may be exercised by benches thereof, one comprising of the Chairman, a Judicial Member and a technical Member and the other comprising of a Judicial Member and a Technical member. (b) xxxxxxxxx (c) xxxxxxxxx (d) xxxxxxxxx (6) xxxxxxxxxxx (7) The Special Court may, by notification, make regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act relating to the procedure to be followed for the conduct of the cases and for regulating the manner of taking decisions. (8) xxxxxxxxxx (9) (1) Notwithstanding anything in the code of Civil Procedure. 1908. the Special court may follow its own procedure which shall not be inconsistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play and subject to the other provisions of this Act while deciding the amount of compensation to be awarded to the Electricity Utility. (ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 260 or Section 262 of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under this Act shall be tried in a summary way by the Special Court and the provisions of the Sections 263 to 265 of the said Code shall, as far as may be apply to the such trial. 49-E. Procedure and powers of the Special court : (1) The Special Court may either suo motu on a complaint under Section 50 of this Act, take cognizance of such cases arising out of any alleged act of theft of energy whether before or after the commencement of this Act, where the value of compensation to be awarded to the electricity Utility concerned exceeds rupees five lakhs and pass such orders (including orders by way of interim directions) as it deems fit: provided that if in the opinion of the special Court, any complaint filed before it is prima facie frivolous or vexatious, it shall reject the same without any further enquiry. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or the Andhra pradesh civil Courts, Act, 1972, any case in respect of an alleged act of theft or energy under sub-section (1) shall be triable only in the Special Court and the decision of the special Court shall be final. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or the Andhra pradesh civil Courts, Act, 1972, any case in respect of an alleged act of theft or energy under sub-section (1) shall be triable only in the Special Court and the decision of the special Court shall be final. (3) If the Special Court is of the opinion that any case brought before it, is not a fit case to be taken cognizance of by it, may return the same for presentation before the Special tribunal. Provided that if on an application from any interested person to withdraw and try a case pending before any Special Tribunal, the special Court is of the opinion, that it is a fit case to be withdrawn and tried by it, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, withdraw any such case from such Special tribunal and shall deal with it as if the case was originally instituted before the Special court. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it shall be lawful for the Special Court to try all offences punishable under this Act. (5)xxxxxxxxxx (6) xxxxxxxxxx (7) xxxxxxxxxx (8) xxxxxxxxxx (9) Any case, pending before any Court or other authority immediately before the constitution of a Special Court as would have been within the jurisdiction of such special Court, shall stand transferred to the special Court as if the cause of action on which such suit or proceeding is based had arisen after the constitution of the Special court. 49. F. Special Court to have the powers of the civil Court and the Court of Sessions : save as expressly provided in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts act, 1972 and the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973, insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, shall apply to proceedings before the special Court and for the purposes of the provisions of the said enactments, the Special court shall be deemed to be a civil Court, or as the case may be, a Court of Session and shall have all the powers of a civil Court and a Court of a Session and the person conducting a prosecution before the Special court shall be deemed to be a Public prosecutor. " (Emphasis is mine) ( 8 ) IT is obvious from a glance at the above referred provisions that a Special court shall be constituted for the purpose of trial of cases and for awarding compensation to the Electricity Utility, arising out of the act of theft of energy where the value of compensation to be awarded to the electricity Utility concerned exceeds rupees five lakhs. This power conferred on the special Court is regardless of anything contained either in the Code of Civil procedure, 1908 or the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 or the Andhra Pradesh civil Courts Act, 1972. It shall be lawful for the Special Court to try all offences punishable under the Act notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal procedure. The Special Court can return the case in respect of which the cognizance has been taken earlier if it is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to be taken cognizance of by it for presentation before the Special Tribunal. More important is in regard to the powers conferred on the Special court under Section 49-F of the Act. The special Court shall be deemed to be a civil court or, as the case may be, a Court of session having the power of a civil Court or court of Session respectively. ( 9 ) A perusal of Sections 49-C and 49-F keeping both the provisions in juxtaposition would leave no room for any doubt that while in the former provision no specific status has been conferred upon the special Tribunal but under the latter provision the status of a civil Court or, as the case may be, a Court of Session has been conferred upon a Special Court. It is obvious, therefore, that although a Court of district and Sessions Judge has been specified as a Special Tribunal by the State government under the Act with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the state, the Special Tribunal has not been given the status of a Court of Session unlike in the case of a Special Court, which is an appellate forum under the Act in respect of the matters to be disposed of by the special Tribunal. It is quite impermissible under the circumstances to draw the necessary conclusion by virtue of the fact that a Court of District and Sessions Judge has been specified as a Tribunal, that the tribunal is of a status equivalent to District and Sessions Judge in the absence of any provision conferring such status, a fortiori when such a status has been conferred upon a Special Court, which is an appellate forum over the decisions rendered by the special Tribunal. The Special Tribunal as well as the Special Court cannot, therefore, be of an equal status. On a holistic view of the provisions of the Act, I am of the considered view that the Special Tribunal is not a Court of Session. It functions in a dual capacity as a criminal Court as well as civil Court. Once it is not a Court of session, as a original Court it can take cognizance of all the cases and the question of committing the case does not arise at all. ( 10 ) THEREFORE the decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Referring Officer v. Shekar Nair, 1999 (3) ALT 533 (D. B) and the decision of the Apex Court in gangula Ashok v. State of A. P. , (2000) 2 scc 504 , have no application to the present facts. Those two cases arise out of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) act, 1989. The Special Court established under the provisions of that Act is a Court of Session as envisaged by the said Act. Once it is clearly understood to be a Court of Session although it has been specified as a Special Court under the provisions of the act, the Apex Court in the judgment referred to supra was of the view that it would continue to be a Court of Session and its designation as Special Court would not denude of its character as such or its power as a Court of Session. Under such circumstances, considering Section 193 of the Code, which has not been dispensed with directly or by necessary implication under the provisions of the said Act, was held to be applicable to the cases before the Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of atrocities) Act, 1989. Under such circumstances, considering Section 193 of the Code, which has not been dispensed with directly or by necessary implication under the provisions of the said Act, was held to be applicable to the cases before the Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of atrocities) Act, 1989. ( 11 ) THE Special Tribunal constituted under the Act acts in dual capacity as afore discussed. Sub-section (5) of Section 49 of the Act clearly mandates that all suits or proceedings pending before any Court or other authority immediately before the j commencement of the Amendment Act shall stand transferred to the Special Tribunal as if the causes of action on which those suits are based had arisen after the advent of the Act. Not only that, under Section 49-I of the Act, the Special Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to decide any dispute relating to correctness or otherwise of any meter. The compensation awarded by the Special tribunal shall be recovered as if it were a decree of civil Court as can be seen from sub-section (4) of Section 49-C of the Act. These are the necessary indicia which buttresses the view taken herein above the special Tribunal acts as a civil Court as well as criminal Court while adjudicating the cases before it. ( 12 ) ACCORDING to sub-section (5) of | Section 49-C, of the Act the Special Court can also direct a case before it to be returned for presentation before the Special tribunal provided the Special Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to be taken cognizance of by it. If such cases are returned by Special Court for being presented before the Special Tribunal, the special Tribunal has to take cognizance of those cases and at that stage, the interdiction contained under Section 193 of the Code by no stretch of the imagination can be applied. If such cases are returned by Special Court for being presented before the Special Tribunal, the special Tribunal has to take cognizance of those cases and at that stage, the interdiction contained under Section 193 of the Code by no stretch of the imagination can be applied. If it is a case which has been taken cognizance of by the Special Court and is returned having been of the opinion that it is not a case to be tried by it, for presentation before the Special Tribunal and the Special tribunal can take cognizance of the same not being fettered by the interdiction contained in Section 193 of the Code, I see no reason as to why the cases instituted before it in the first instance cannot be taken cognizance directly without any committal thereof. ( 13 ) BE that as it may, it is appropriate here to consider Sections 4 and 5 of the Code. Section 4 of the Code clearly envisages the trial of offences under the indian Penal Code and other laws according to the provisions of the Code, but subject to the provisions of any enactment for the time being in force regulating the manner in which they shall be tried. Therefore, the offences envisaged by the Special enactments shall have to be tried in accordance with the code but subject to the provisions contained in that special enactment. Section 5 clearly says that the provisions of the Code shall not affect any special or local law or any special jurisdiction or power conferred or any special forum or procedure prescribed by any other law for the time being in force in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary. A perusal of these two provisions would make it clear that the provisions of the Code for the purpose of enquiry or trial would apply not only to the cases enumerated in the Indian Penal code but also to the cases enumerated in any special or local law but subject to the provisions contained in that special or local law, and further the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall not affect the trial of the cases under the special or local law in the absence of the provisions to the contrary contained in the special or local law. Therefore, when the State amendment Act clearly contemplates the applicability of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure for trial of those cases subject to the provisions contained in the special enactment, it is difficult to hold section 193 of the Code applies here and because of the interdict contained therein, these cases are required to be committed by the Courts of Magistrate to the respective special Tribunals. ( 14 ) IN the written arguments submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, it was contended inter alia, that it was a tribunal but not a Court and, therefore, the committal proceedings as envisaged under section 209 of the Code and the interdict contained in Section 193 of the Code have no application. I am afraid, the said reasoning cannot be countenanced. As discussed by me herein above, the Special tribunal acts in dual capacity. It has all the trappings of a Court while disposing of the criminal cases it has to follow the summary procedure and the principles of Indian evidence Act would apply. The judgments rendered by the Special Tribunal are final subject to the result of the appeal before the special Court. Therefore, the contention that it is a Tribunal but not a Court cannot be accepted, not withstanding the nomenclature. ( 15 ) FOR the foregoing reasons, I am of the considered view that the committal procedure as envisaged under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure has no application to the matters arising out of the indian Electricity Act as amended by the state Amendment Act 35 of 2000 and the jurisdiction of the Special Tribunal is exclusive. ( 16 ) APROPOS the point No. 3, it is expedient here to quote the general observations made in Corpus Juris as extracted in N. S. Bindra s Interpretation of Statutes Eighth Edition at page 635 thus:"in accordance with the rule generally applicable to legislative enactments, unless required in express terms, or by clear implication, an amendatory Act will be construed prospectively and not retrospectively and the parts not altered are considered as having been the law from the time they were enacted. So also where a statute, or a portion thereof, is amended by setting forth the amended section in full, the provisions of the original statute, that are repealed are to be considered as having been the law from the time they were first enacted, and the new provisions or the changed provisions are to be understood as enacted at the time the amended Act takes effect not to have any retrospective operation. Proceedings instituted, orders made, and judgments rendered, before the passage of amendment will, therefore, not be affected by it, but will continue to be governed by the original statute. However, in accordance with the rule applicable to status generally amendments which are purely remedial operate retrospectively, and those which merely cause changes in the adjective or procedural law apply to all cases pending and subsequent to their enactment, whether the cause accrued prior to or subsequent to the time the change became effective unless there is a saving clause as to existing litigation, or accrued causes of action. But amendments causing changes in the adjective or procedural law will not operate retrospectively so as to affect a proceeding entirely closed before the amendment because effective. " (Emphasis is mine) ( 17 ) SECTION 6 of the General Clauses Act is germane for consideration in this regard and the same may be extracted herein below for better understanding of the matter. "6. " (Emphasis is mine) ( 17 ) SECTION 6 of the General Clauses Act is germane for consideration in this regard and the same may be extracted herein below for better understanding of the matter. "6. Effect of repeal.-Where this Act, or any central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not - (a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect; or (b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder; or (c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or (d) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed; or (e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture, or punishment as aforesaid; and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act or Regulation had not been passed. " ( 18 ) A perusal of the said provision, particularly clauses (d) and (e), would leave no room for any doubt that the matters which culminated in a conviction followed by the appropriate sentences and are being assailed in a pending appeal, will not be affected by the repeal of the enactment. The repeal of the Act or Amendment of the Act is not mutually exclusive, because substitution by legislative enactment of a provision naturally involves repeal of the old provision. Vide Allied Exports and imports and Gudur, Nellore, M/s. v. State of andhra Pradesh, AIR 1971 AP 218 at P. 226 = (1971) 2 ALT 163 (FB), and C. Rajalakshmi v. Assistant Controller, Estate duty, Hyderabad, ILR (1972) AP 480 at 491. In view of this provision, the pending appeals before the regular fora shall be allowed to be adjudicated by those fora. It has been held by the Apex Court in jayantilal Amertlal v. Union of India, air 1971 SC 1193 , thus:". . . . . THERE are no provisions in the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 which are inconsistent with Rule 126 (1) (10) of the Rules. It has been held by the Apex Court in jayantilal Amertlal v. Union of India, air 1971 SC 1193 , thus:". . . . . THERE are no provisions in the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 which are inconsistent with Rule 126 (1) (10) of the Rules. That being so, action taken under that rule must be deemed to be continuing in view of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. It is true that Gold (Control) Act, 1968 does not purport to incorporate into that Act the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses act. But the provisions therein are not inconsistent with the provisions in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. Hence the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses act, are attracted in view of the repeal of the gold (Control ) Ordinance, 1968. As the gold (Control) Act does not exhibit a difference or contrary intention, proceedings, initiated under the repealed law must be held to continue. . . . . . . "the Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Rameshwar Rathod, AIR 1990 SC 1849 , in para 5 held thus:"hot only that are no specific words to indicate the provisions of retrospective effect but the positive provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 1 are to the effect that the amendment must be deemed to have come in effect on a particular date is a pointer and that puts the matter beyond doubt. "very recently a Division Bench of this Court in Ch. Prabhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2001 (4) ALT 695 (D. B.), has also taken the same view. In para 25, it has been held thus:"in the light of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that although in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 49-C all pending cases may be transferred, no right of appeal or revision can be taken away nor an accused can be deprived of a better procedure which would conform to the provisions of articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of india. As on the date of coming into force of the amendment Act, charge-sheet had already been filed and four witnesses were already examined by the III Metropolitan Magistrate and trial is being proceeded within accordance with law as was existing at that time. As on the date of coming into force of the amendment Act, charge-sheet had already been filed and four witnesses were already examined by the III Metropolitan Magistrate and trial is being proceeded within accordance with law as was existing at that time. Therefore, in such a situation, the petitioner-accused persons, in view of the provisions of Article 20, have a vested right as regards forum for continuance of the case in the criminal Court. We are. therefore, of the view that the provisions of the Amendment Act, 2000 cannot be made applicable to a case of this nature. " ( 19 ) ON a holistic view of the provisions of the Amendment Act, I am of the considered view that there is nothing in the act which suggests any retrospective operation. The Act 35 of 2000 is deemed to have come into force on and from 31-7-2000, the date on which the Ordinance was promulgated by the Governor of andhra Pradesh. That is an indicia that it operates only from that date. Therefore, there can be no room for any doubt whether it is case of prospective or retrospective operation. All the appeals which are pending adjudication before the appellate fora will have to be adjudicated in accordance with the law prevailing on the date of institution of those cases. ( 20 ) TURNING to points 2 and 4, the special enactment prescribed a procedure to be followed in trying the case arising out of the Indian Electricity Act as amended by the andhra Pradesh Statement Amendment Act. As discussed by me supra and in view of sections 4 and 5 of the Code, the procedure envisaged by the Code would apply only when there is nothing contained to the contra in the provisions of the special enactment. Now the special enactment prescribes a procedure, namely, summary procedure to be followed. In that view of the matter, i fail to understand as to why there arises a doubt as to which procedure is to be followed and when once the summary procedure is to be followed as mandated under Section 49-C of the Act, it has to be followed. In that view of the matter, i fail to understand as to why there arises a doubt as to which procedure is to be followed and when once the summary procedure is to be followed as mandated under Section 49-C of the Act, it has to be followed. When it is the case where the summary procedure is to be followed, whether the cases arising out of the Amended act shall have to be registered as Calendar cases or Summary Trial Cases cannot be the criterion in my considered view. The special Court is empowered to make regulations relating to the procedure to be followed for the conduct of the cases and for regulating the manner for taking decisions. Therefore, there is no need to answer point No. 4. ( 21 ) IN the result, the reference is answered accordingly.