D.S.Sinha, J. - (1.) The order dated 25th January, 1993 and the report dated 30th November. 1992. appended to the petition as Annexures-'VIII' and 'VI' respectively, passed by the Stamp Reporter and the Taxing Officer of this Court in relation to the question of sufficiency of the court-fees paid by the petitioner on the memorandum of the First Appeal No. 358 of 1990, Lalta Prasad v. Collector. Varanasi and others, are under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) Before filing the memo of appeal, the petitioner obtained a report dated 8th May, 1990 on the sufficiency of the court-fees as required by Rule 3 of Chapter XI of the Rules of Court. 1952 holding the court-fees paid by the petitioner to be sufficient. The appeal was admitted by the Court on 16th May. 1990.
(3.) Later on, an objection being raised in that regard, the Court, vide its order dated 13th November. 1992, called for a fresh report on the sufficiency of the court-fees paid by the petitioner. Stamp Reporter Submitted report dated 30th November. 1992 holding that there was deficiency of court-fees to the tune of Rs. 99.057.50. On 30th November, 1992, the Court passed an order granting ten days-time to the petitioner to file objection against the report of the Stamp Reporter to be considered by the Taxing Officer, declared by the Hon'ble Chief Justice under Section 5 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, hereinafter called the 'Act'. Objection and counter objection were filed and considered by the Taxing Officer. The Taxing Officer passed the order dated 25th January, 1993 upholding the report of the Stamp Reporter dated 30th November. 1992 and calling upon the petitioner to make deficiency in court-fees good.;