Smt. Manmati Devi vs State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 4332 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Smt. Manmati Devi vs State Of Jharkhand on 30 November, 2023

Author: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Gautam Kumar Choudhary

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  W.P.(C) No. 3157 of 2023
                                           ------

1. Smt. Manmati Devi

2. Alok Ranjan .... .... .... Petitioners Versus

1. State of Jharkhand

2. District Certificate Officer, Palamau

3. General Manager, National Small Industries Corporation Limited, having its office at Hudson Tower, New Market, Kolkata

4. M/s Kamla Construction co. through its Managing Director Shri Santosh Kumar Singh, having its office at opposite Bazar Samiti, Medinanagar, Palamau

5. Shri Ragunath Singh

6. Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh

7. Shri Dilip Kumar Singh .... .... .... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioners : Mr. Kalyan Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Aman Kumar, AC to GP I

Order No.05 / Dated : 30.11.2023 Instant petition has been filed against the impleadment of the petitioners as judgment debtors in Certificate Case No.197/2019-2020 without deciding the objections filed by the petitioners under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1974. The husband of the petitioner was partner of M/s Kamla Industries who had taken loan from respondent no.3 sometimes in the year 1988. A loan of Rs.25,18,889/- and the part of the loan amount has already been paid. The husband of the petitioner no.1, who was the partner when the loan had been taken, died in the year 2018.

The certificate proceeding was initiated by respondent no.3 being Certificate Case No.197/2019-2020 before the District Collector, Kolkata on 26.03.2018. The certificate case was transferred to Deputy Commissioner, Palamau from where notice has been issued.

Before entering into the grounds on which the notice has been impugned, it appears that the objection petition which was filed by petitioners under Section 9 of Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1974 before the Court of District Certificate Officer, Palamau, has not been heard and disposed of.

Under the circumstance, without entering into the merit of instant writ petition, respondent no.2 is directed to dispose of the objection under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1974 within eight weeks of the order.

No coercive step will be taken by respondent no.2 before the disposal of the objection petition and the Petitioners will appear through counsel before Certificate Officer within two weeks to press their objection petition, failing which order for no-coercive step shall stand vacated.

The writ petition stands disposed of. Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit