AMAR JYOTI PRESS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners by this writ application prayed for writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 16th September, 1995 passed by the respondent No. 3 the Certificate Officer, Patna City on Certificate Case No. 360 of 1989-90. The petitioners also prayed for quashing of the certificate signed by the respondent No. 3 under Section 5 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act on the basis of requisition submitted by the certificate holder. A prayer has also been made for quashing the notice issued by the Certificate Officer whereby the petitioners were called upon to pay the entire amount of Rs. 16, 36, 865.82 on or before 27th September, 1995 failing which Distress Warrant and warrant of arrest were to be issued simultaneously.

(2.) In the instant case, there was no dispute with regard to the fact the petitioners availed financial assistance from the respondent No. 4 State Bank of India, Patna City Branch, Patna and on default, a certificate proceeding was initiated. It appears that the petitioners moved this Court earlier by filing C.W. J.C. No 2321/93 for quashing the order dated 9.2.1993 passed by the Certificate Officer whereby the petitioners were directed to pay Rs. 60, 000/-every month by way of instalment towards the satisfaction of the certificate dues. The said order was challenged on the ground that the petitioners were not given opportunity of hearing on the objection filed by them. The said writ application was disposed of by judgment and order dated 8.3.1994. By the said order, this Court directed the respondent No. 3 to decide the objection raised by the petitioners in their application denying their liability to pay the claim amount of money by resort to processes under the Act. A copy of the said order passed by this Court is Annexure-5 to this writ application. It further appears that in compliance of the direction of this Court aforesaid the Certificate Officer, took up the objection filed by the petitioners under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Recovery (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'said Act') and disposed of the same by the impugned order. A copy of the said order is Annexure-1 to the writ application. The petitioners have challenged the said order on various grounds which have been stated in the writ application:

(3.) A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent Bank stating inter alia that from the allegations made in the writ application, it would appear that serious disputed questions of fact are involved and the same may not be decided properly in a writ case. Strong objection has been taken that the impugned order dated 16th September, 1995 was passed by the Certificate Officer under Section 10 of the said Act and the petitioners having filed the instant writ application without exhausting appeal or revision against the said order, the writ application is prematured and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine. It was further stated that the petitioners are litigating the matter merely to delay the realisation of the huge amount to the tune of Rs. 16, 36, 865.82 which is public money.