SUDHAKAR PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS common questions of law and facts have arisen in these writ petitions and parties being the same in all of them, they were heard together for the sake of convenience. We therefore intend to dispose of them by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioner in each of the writ petitions seeks quashing of the concerned certificate proceeding initiated against him on the file of the Certificate Officer, Dhenkanal. We may now set out the relevant facts and circumstances. Although several grounds have been taken in support of the writ petitions, Shri Mukherjee in course of argument urged a sole point. We may make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the points not urged by the learned counsel which are available to him to be raised in future in case of necessity.

(3.) OPPOSITE party No. 3 is the Collector. Dhenkanal. He is the certificate holder. Counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf wherein it has been stated that the money due to the Government from the petitioner comes under the provisions of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Orissa Act') as the 'arrears of land revenue' by virtue of Section 4 of the Public Accountants' Default Act, 1850. The amount covered under the certificate proceedings has been found out by the final audit report which comes within the definition of 'Public Demand' [vide Section 2 (g) of the Orissa Act read with Schedule -I (ix)]. It has been also stated that on the basis of the information lodged by the Collector in respect of interim audit report, criminal proceedings have been started against the petitioner. With regard to the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, it has been averred that the Collector has received Government concurrence under Rule 7 of the Orissa Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1992 for taking disciplinary action against him as he has since retired from service and disciplinary proceedings are pending.