37. In Piare Dusadh's case (AIR 1944 FC 1) (supra) the Special Criminal Courts (Repeal) Ordinance, 1943 which conferred validity and full effectiveness on sentences passed by special courts which functioned under the Special Criminal Courts Ordinance. 1942 was challengd. It was argued in Piare Dusadh's case (supra) that the 1943 Ordinance attempted to exercise judicial power. The Federal Court did not accept the contention on the ground that in India the legislature has enacted laws providing that suits which had been dismissed on a particular view of the law must be restored and retried. Our Federal Court said that Partliament simply takes up certain determinations which exist in fact, though made without authority, and prescribes not that they shall be acts done by a board of Review, but that they shall be treated as they would be treated if they were such acts. The sections do not constitute an exercise of the judicial power. The legislature had not attempted to decide the question of the guilt or innocence of any of the accused. That question had as a matter of fact been decided by tribunals which were directed to follow a certain judicial procedure. Our Federal Court held that once the decisions of the special courts were held void for want of jurisdiction the legislature created those special courts and authorised them to try cases and pass sentences. The legislature gave jourisdiction to the courts to pass the sentences. The Ordinance did not exercise any judicial power because the sentences in due course were subject to an appeal and review by the regular courts of the land. 38. The power of the legislature to validate matters which have been found by judgments or orders of competent courts and Tribunals to the invalid or illegal is a well-known pattern. The legislature validates acts and things done by which the basis of Judgments or orders of competent courts and Tribunal is changed and the judgments and orders are made ineffective. All the Sales Tax Validation cases, the election validation cases are illustrations of that proposition. The present appeals are not of the type of providing indemnity against penalties or determining existing facts to be treated in accordance with change of law. 39. The effect of validation is to change the law so as to alter the basis of any judgment, which might have been given on the basis of old law and thus make the judgment ineffective. A formal declaration that the judgment rendered under the old Act is void, is not necesary. if the matter is pending in appeal, the appellate court has to give effect to the altered law and reverse the judgment. The rendering of a judgment ineffective by changing its basis by legislative enactment is not an encroachment on judicial power but a legislation within the competence of the Legislature rendering the basis of the judgment non est. If a competent court has found that a particular tax or levy has been imposed by a law, which is void because the legislature passing the law was not competent to pass the law, then the competent legislature has validated the tax or levy by a validation Act involving a re-enactment of the invalid law. Where the competent legislature has passed a law which is contrary to any of the Fundamental Rights in Part III of the Constitution and the law has been declared void by a competent court, the appropriate legislature has passed a retrospective law validating the actions taken under the old invalid law by curing the defects in the old law so as to make the new law consistent with Part III of the Constitution. 40. Where invalid elections declared by reason of corrupt practices have been validated by changing the definition of corrupt practices in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 retrospectively the original judgment is rendered ineffective.