at the time when the state of dhenkanal.
79 and 80 of 1963 and 140 of 1962.
the petitioner failed in persuading the appellate authority to set aside the order of assess ment and so has filed the present writ petition challenging the validity of the act and the order of assessment.
79 and 80 of 1963 .
9000 and odd and it has to be paid by her from 1958 retrospectively.
v. gupte additional solicitor general s. b. misra ganapathi lyer and r. n. sachthey for the respondents in all the petitions .
32 of the companystitution and claimed a declaration that the operative provisions of the orissa private lands of rulers assessment of rent act 1958 hereinafter called the act and the rules framed thereunder are unconstitutional and ultra vires.
c. setalvad j. b. dadachanji ravinder narain and o. c. mathur for the interveners in petition number 140/ 1962 .
the petitioner then preferred appeals to the board of revenue against the said assessment orders but these appeals were dismissed.
the petitioner in w.p.
thus the facts on which the three petitions claim relief are substantially similar and they have raised common points of law for our decision.
january 23 1964.
number 79/1963 is smt.
these lands were never subjected to the payment of rent and yet the revenue offi cers assessed rents in respect of these lands under the provisions of the act.
the appeals preferred by the petitioner against the said order of assessment failed and so the petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the validity of the act as well as the validity of the assessment order.
merged with india the petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of lands in five villages as a proprietor.
and 5 kadis of land in niz garh town as his private lands.
in her petition she has referred to the fact that from time to time the government of the day had refrained from levying any assessment in respect of her lands and thereby recognised her right to hold the said villages on assessment free basis.
the private lands in the possession and enjoyment of the three respective petitioners have been assessed by the revenue officers in companyformity with the rules framed under the act.
the petitioner in w.p.
in respect of these lands assessment had never been levied but purporting to give effect to the relevant provisions of the act the revenue officer dhenkanal assessed rent in respect of all the lands which are in possession and enjoyment of the petitioner.
32 of the companystitution of india for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
original jurisdiction writ petitions number.
these villages were granted to her for maintenance a long time ago and as such they have been recorded in the village papers as khoraki posaki maintenance grant lands since the last settlement of 1918.
that is why the three petitions have been heard together and would be disposed of by a companymon judgment.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. the petitioners in these three petitions have moved this companyrt under art.
rani ratna prova devi who is the wife of raja sankar pratap singh deo mahindra bahadur ex ruler of dhenkanal state in orissa.
the petitioner in writ petition number 140/1962 is the patrani saheba of keonjhar and is in possession and enjoyment of eight villages viz.
the petitioners claim a writ or direction or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the said orders of assessment.
petitions under art.
she has held these lands without paying assessment and her case is that the relevant provisions of the act which authorise the levy of assessment in respect of her lands are unconstitutional and invalid.
n. andley rameshawar nath and p. l. vohra for the petitioner in petition number.
the revenue officer of keonjhar levied an assessment in respect of the said villages purporting to act under the rules framed under the provisions of the act.
mangalpur barigan nua rampas nilung ghutru mohadijore patang and anara in the district of keonjhar.
sarjoo prasad ajoy kumar gajdhar mahapatra and d. mathur for the petitioner in petition number 140/1962 .
the assessment levied against the petitioner in respect of these lands is of the order of rs.
