AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
I. That the present writ application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ order/ direction(s)in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the certificate case no- 64 of 2014-2015 which has been initiated against the petitioner on the basis certificate which forms part of section -7 notice is contrary to the statuary rules of Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914(herein after referred as "P.D.R.Act, 1914" for the sake of brevity) as it is blank at many column which is evident from the certificate and the requisition attached in Annexure-5, 5/A, 5/B to this writ application thus amount to defective notice and defective initiation of the certificate case;
II. That the present writ application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ order/ direction(s)in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the certificate case no- 64 of 2014-2015 which has been initiated against the petitioner under section-7 of the Public demand recovery act by which it is asked to pay amount on the ground that the process is not followed properly by the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Kaimur(Bhabhua)( herein after referred as "B.S.F.C" for the sake of brevity) in serving the notice, without following the mandatory process which is in violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner;
III. That the present writ application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ order/ direction(s)in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the entire ordersheet including the order dated 30.04.2016 passed in certificate case no-64 of 2014-2015 i.e the warrant issued against the petitioner; on the ground that the same is without the proper certificate or requisition under the Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 and thus the whole process is without jurisdiction and also without deciding the objection under section-9 of the P.D.R.Act, 1914;
IV. That the present writ application is being filed for the issuance of an appropriate writ order/direction(s) in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the certificate case no-64 of 2014-2015 which has been initiated against the petitioner; on the ground that the court fees has not been paid by the B.S.F.C while instituting the certificate case before the Certificate Officer, Kaimur (Bhabhua) and the limitation will apply in the present case.
V. And for issuance of any other relief or relief(s) for which the petitioner is entitled for.
Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents.
It is the specific contention of the Learned counsel for the petitioner that, in spite of filing an objection under Section 9 of the PDR Act, the Certificate Officer, without passing any order under Section 10 of the PDR Act, has proceeded further by issuing a warrant against the petitioner, which is illegal and arbitrary. It is the further contention of the Learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire certificate proceedings are in violation of the principles of natural justice, and prayed for quashing of the same.
A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, contending that the Writ petition is not maintainable, as the petitioner has failed to avail the statutory remedy provided under the provisions of the PDR Act. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner had executed an agreement with the District Manager, SFC, Kaimur, for milling of paddy for the paddy procurement year 2012-13. In terms and conditions of the agreement, the petitioner was required to deposit 100% of the CMR within the cut off date prescribed by the Government. However, the petitioner failed to do so and defalcated public food grains amounting to Rs. 30,42,611.80/-. Despite repeated instructions of the District Manager, SFC, to the petitioner to deposit the balance CMR before the cut-off date, the petitioner neither deposited the outstanding amount nor submitted any reply. Consequently, the District Manager, SFC, was constrained to submit a requisition before the Certificate Officer for initiation of a certificate proceedings for recovery of the amount. It is the further stated that the petitioner appeared and filed an objection under Section 9 of the Act on 01.11.2014 and that the proceedings under Section 10 of the Act are presntly pending, as the petitioner has not been participating in proceeding before the Certificate Officer.
Having considered the rival submission of both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the warrant has been issued against the petitioner without passing any final order under Section 10 of the PDR Act, which is illegal per se. Hence, the warrant issued against the petitioner is liable to be set aside.
Admittedly, the objection filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the PDR Act, is still pending. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Certificate Officer on 01.09.2027 and in turn, the Certificate Officer after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner shall pass an appropriate, reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within three months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.
Till the passing of the final order by the Certificate Officer, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations, the Writ petition stands disposed of.
Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.