Kailash Prasad, J. - (1.) THESE are two connected petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. They arise from proceedings under the U.P. Large Land Holdings Act. Writ petition No. 2706 of 1959 has been filed by Smt. Madhuri Varma and the Petitioner in writ petition No. 2707 of 1959 is Sri Lutfur Rahman.
(2.) THESE Petitioners hold land in the villages of Bhabar area. For the assessment year 1957 -58, corresponding to agricultural year 1365 Fasli, the assessing authority assessed a tax of Rs. 489.31 nP. on Smt. Madhuri Verma and of Rs. 254.60 nP. on Sri Lutfur Rahman under the U.P. Large Land Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Being dissatisfied with the orders of the assessing authority, the Assessees filed appeals before the Commissioner under Section 11 of the Act. The Commissioner, by separate orders, allowed the appeals and set aside the orders of assessment. He found that the cases involved certain questions on which there was no evidence or material on record. He, therefore, framed two issues on those points and remanded the cases to the assessing authority with a direction to take all possible evidence for a proper decision on those points and also make a local inspection and, after determining those points, make an assessment afresh according to law. Against the orders of the Commissioner the State filed revisions before the Board of Revenue. It appears that when the cases were received by the assessing authority on being remanded by the Commissioner, the assessing authority proceeded to decide them according to the directions contained in the orders of remand, as no orders staying the assessment proceedings were received by him from the Board. On rehearing the cases, the assessing authority fixed the amount of tax on Smt. Madhuri Varma at Rs. 143.20 nP. but in respect of Lutfur Rahman it found that the annual valuation of the land holding' of Lutfur Rahman was below the assessable minimum. It, therefore, held that no tax was to be assessed on Lutfur Rahman for the year 1957 -58. If further ordered that Rs. 63.55 nP. which were paid by Lutfur Rahman on account of the first instalment of the tax originally assessed on him shall be refunded to him. The State filed revisions before the Board of Revenue against these subsequent orders of the assessing authority also.
(3.) IT may be mentioned here that there was another Assessee, namely, Mirza Nizamuddin Ahmad. The assessing authority had originally assessed a tax of Rs. 50 on him. He, too, had filed an appeal before the Commissioner who had allowed it and remanded the case to the assessing authority for determination of two more points which were the same as had arisen in the case of Smt. Madhuri Varma and Sri Lutfur Rahman. In his case, too, the State filed a revision before the Board of Revenue against the order of the Commissioner remanding the case to the assessing authority and another revision against the subsequent order of the assessing authority made on the rehearing of the case after remand. Thus there were six revisions in all before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue disposed of the six revisions by a common judgment dated 25 -8 -1959. The Board of Revenue allowed the revisions, set aside the orders of remand passed by the Commissioner and also subsequent assessment orders passed by the assessing authority and restored the original assessment orders of the assessing authority. The present petitions by Smt. Madhuri Varma and Sri Lutfur Rahman have been filed challenging the Board's order.;