R. N. PRASAD - (1.) In both the cases similar question of law and facts are involved. They have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) In C.W.J.C. No. 1659(R) the petitioners have challenged the demand made vide letter dated 17-11-1985, Annexure-9, directing to deposit arrear of rent and cess for the period 1-1-1956 to 31st March, 1985 by 11th December, 1985 and also revised demand made vide letter dated 21-11-1985 directing to pay arrears of rent and cess by the aforesaid date i.e. 11th December, 1985. By amendment the petitioners have also challenged the order dated 2-1-1986 passed by respondent No. 2, Annexure-15, by which the representation of the petitioners has been rejected.
(3.) In C.W.J.C. No. 1671/91 (R) the petitioners have challenged the order dated 10-6-1991 directing to pay cess for the period 11-4-1985 to 21-3-1990 by 20-6-1991, Annexure-30, pursuant to the order dated 29-5-1991 passed in certificae case No. 3/90-91, Annexure-29. However, during the course of argument learned counsel for the petitioners did not challenge the demand with respect to payment of arrear of rent.;