AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Date : 20-08-2026
I.A. No. 1 of 2025:
I.A. No. 1 of 2025 is filed to amend the prayer portion at paragraph 1 of the Writ petition due to the subsequent developments as 1(iv), (v) and (vi)
Accordingly, I.A. No. 1 of 2025 is hereby allowed, amending the prayer portion. The reliefs mentioned in paragraph No. 1, 2, and 3) thereof would form part of the Writ petition.
C.W.J.C. No. 17711 of 2015
The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for the following reliefs:
“(i). For issuance of Writ /Writs, order/orders, direction/directions the in nature of Certiorari for quashing the Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16 dated 24.04.2015 issued by the District Certificate Officer, Araria, whereby and whereunder in the certificate proceeding case has been initiated for recovery of the alleged amount of Rs. 2,27,55,480.71 (Rupes two crore twenty seven lakhs fifty five thousand four hundred eighty and seventy one paise) by initiating a certificate proceeding through the Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16. In the aforesaid certificate proceeding case, u/s 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 the notice has been issued by the District Certificate Officer, Araria in the name of the petitioner.
ii) Further praying that during the pendency of the Writ application may kindly stay the proceeding of Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16 initiated by the District Certificate Officer, Araria, for recovery of alleged amount of Rs. 2,27,55,480.71 (Rupes two crore twenty seven lakhs fifty five thousand four hundred eighty and seventy one paise).
iii) For further any other relief / reliefs, order / orders, direction / directions may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv)For set aside the order impugned dated 05.03.2025, passed by the District Certificate Officer, Araria whereby and whereunder directed the petitioner's information before the issuances warrant for attachment and arrest due to non-recovery ofGovernment Money in Certificate Case No. 02/2015- 16. filed the case for recovery of interest and money, legal and final notice were also given to the petitioner in it and also directed the petitioner has always disobeyed the Court, therefore, directed the petitioner must deposit the related amount by 02.04.2025, otherwise, attachment/warrant will be issued against the petitioner and the outstanding amount will be recovered be strictly warned about the said case.
(v)For further prayed for seeking quashing for set aside order impugned dated 05.03.2025, issued by the District Certificate Officer, Araria in Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16 and directed the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,27,55,480.71/- fleeing which attachment/warrant will be issued against the petitioner, if the said amount is not deposited by the petitioner till 02.04.2025.
(vi)For further prayed for stay the order impugned dated 05.03.2025, issued by the District Certificate Officer, Araria in Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16, the petitioner was earlier filed the Writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court, Patna vide C.W.J.C. No. 17711/2015, in which praying for quashing the Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16, for recovery of the amount of Rs. 2,27,55,480.71/- and in the aforesaid Writ petition the matter was heard by this Hon'ble High Court, Patna on dated 04.09.2018, passed by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikash Jain and the operative part of the order, it appears that the parties are agreed the issues in the present Writ petition are similar to the issues involved in SLP(c) No. 16909 of 2016, (Pawapuri Mills Vs. Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Ors.) pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the resultwhereof direct appearing on the present matter as prayed let the matter be listed after disposal of SLP(c) No. 16909 of 2016, in spite of that the District Certificate Officer, Araria has issued the Letter dated 05.03.2025 and directed the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,27,55,480.71/- till 02.04.2025, fleeing which attachment/warrant has been issued against the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner praying for set aside the order impugned dated 05.03.2025, and during the pendency of this Writ application may kindly stay the further proceeding in Certificate Case No. 02/2015-16, till disposal of this C.W.J.C. No. 17711/2015.”
At the very outset, the Learned counsel for the parties contended that since this matter is squarely covered under the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pawapuri Rice Mills Versus Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. & Ors. and other analogous cases reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3777, this Writ petition may also be disposed of on the same terms and conditions.
Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pawapuri Rice Mills (supra) has observed as follows:
“37.The next limb of the argument is that the continuation and the concluding of proceedings by the certificate officers are vitiated by procedural irregularities. The arguments on this behalf are already referred to in the preceding paragraphs. To capture the arguments in a nutshell, it is noted that the initiation is not in accordance with the procedure stipulated under the Act, the procedure prescribed by the Act is not followed, and the principles of natural justice are violated.
38.The Act is a comprehensive and codified enactment that provides adequate safeguards for parties facing recovery actions. Parts II and IV of the Act outline the procedures for filing, serving, and contesting recovery certificates, as well as provisions for appeal, revision, and review. Procedural Safeguards : Part II of the Act outlines the procedure for filing, serving, and adjudicating certificates. Sections 43 and 44 provide remedies to challenge certificates in civil courts on specific grounds. The section provides for a time limit of 6 months for availing the remedy to move to the Civil Court. Sections 60, 62, and 63 deal with appeal, revision, and review of the orders made under the Act.
39.The Division Bench rightly emphasised the availability of these statutory remedies to the aggrieved persons. The Rice Millers, by invoking Writ jurisdiction, have failed to exhaust statutory remedies at the first instance.41. We have perused the record and are of the view that the Rice Millers invoked the Writ remedy by raising a jurisdictional fact against realising the sums as a public demand under the Act. As a Writ court or in an appeal under Article 136, we are not examining the contentions on alleged procedural deviations. We, however, leave it open to the respective Rice Millers to avail a statutory remedy as may be available under the Act. For availing a statutory remedy, we grant thirty days from today to the Rice Millers.
41.We have perused the record and are of the view that the Rice Millers invoked the Writ remedy by raising a jurisdictional fact against realising the sums as a public demand under the Act. As a Writ court or in an appeal under Article 136, we are not examining the contentions on alleged procedural deviations. We, however, leave it open to the respective Rice Millers to avail a statutory remedy as may be available under the Act. For availing a statutory remedy, we grant thirty days from today to the Rice Millers.
42.In the event of a Rice Miller availing a statutory remedy as permitted by this Judgment, the said authority shall entertain the case without reference to the delay and the period of limitation in availing a remedy before the said authority. With the above observation, the civil appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs. ”
Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court finds that the controversy involved in the present Writ petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pawapuri Rice Mills (supra).
Taking into consideration of the Pawapuri Rice Mills (supra) that the petitioner has a statutory remedy under the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914, the Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy available under the law within four weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment before the appropriate authority. The delay in filing the appeal shall be condoned by the authority concerned, and the authority shall dispose of the appeal within three months from the date of filing of the appeal.
In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with the certificate proceeding in question, subject to the petitioner availing the statutory remedy within the aforesaid period.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim or counter-claim of the parties, and all questions are left open to be considered by the competent statutory authority.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ petition stands disposed of.
Interlocutory Application, if any, shall stands disposed of.