Madhav Chandra Singh Age 55 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9083 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Madhav Chandra Singh Age 55 Years Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                  ----

W.P.(C) No. 4774 of 2024

----

Madhav Chandra Singh age 55 years son of late Mihir Singh, resident of H.No.55, Rabnipur, Ranipur, Pakur, PO and PS and District Pakur .... Petitioner

-- Versus --

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.Transport Commissioner of Transport Dept. Jharkhand, Ranchi

3.Dy Commissioner, Godda

4.District Transport Officer, Godda

5.Certificate Officer cum Sub Divisional Officer cum Magistrate, Godda

6.Motor Vehicle Inspector, PO and PS Godda, Dist.Godda .... Respondents

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

         For the Petitioner        :-    Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
         For the State             :-    AC to SC(L&C)-I
                                         ----
2/09.09.2024          Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the

learned counsel for the respondent State.

2. The prayer in this petition has been made for quashing of

the order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the respondent no.5 which was

exercised under Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1940 and

the vehicle of the petitioner has been seized.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits that the said order has been passed without deciding the

objection made under section 9 of the said Act

4. Learned counsel for the respondent State accepts the said

submission that without deciding the objection made under section 9 of

the said Act, the said order has been passed.

5. In view of above, the Court finds that there are statutory

provision as contained in the said Act; to first invite objection under

section 9 of the said Act and after providing full opportunity of hearing

and considering the objection, the appropriate order is required to be

passed which has not been done in the case in hand. The case of the

petitioner is covered in light of the judgment of this Court rendered in

the case of Jagdish Mahto v. State of Jharkhand, (2023)AIR

(Jharkhand) 29.

6. In view of above, the order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the

respondent no.5 is hereby quashed.

7. The matter is remitted back to the respondent no.5 who will

decide the matter afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner in light of the observation made by this Court in the case of

Jagdish Mahto(supra).

8. The Certificate officer is directed to decide the objection filed

under section 9 of the said Act, 1914 on its own merit and in accordance

with law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order. Depending upon the outcome of the aforesaid

decision, the Certificate Officer is at liberty to proceed further in

accordance with law. Needless to say that if the certificate debtor will

not appear before the Certificate Officer, the Certificate Officer will be at

liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

9. With above observation and direction, this petition is

accordingly disposed of.

10. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

SI/,