Patna High Court
Amit Jaiswal vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 18 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17139 of 2016
======================================================
Amit Jaiswal Son of Sri Sunil Jaiswal, resident of Chandan Nagar, Gulab Bag,
P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea, Proprietor M/S Maa Anaapurna Rice Mill,
Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The District Magistrate, Supaul.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Supaul.
4. The Additional District Magistrate, Supaul.
5. The Certificate Officer, Supaul.
6. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation
Limited, Patna.
7. The District Manager, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.,
Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate
For the BSFC : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
: Mr.Utkarsha Utpal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.S. Raza Ahmad- AAG-5
: Mr.Bijoy Kumar Sinha, AC to AAG-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 18-03-2025
1. The petitioner has filed the instant
application for the following reliefs:
"(i) For issuance of an
appropriate writ order/ direction in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the Certificate Case no.
61 of 2014-15 which has been
initiated against the petitioner on
the basis certificate which forms
part of section 7 notice is contrary
Patna High Court CWJC No.17139 of 2016 dt.18-03-2025
2/6
to the statutory rules of Public
Demand Recovery Act, 1914
(herein after referred as PDR Act)
as it is blank at many column.
(ii) For issuance of writ in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the Certificate case no.
61 of 2014-15 which has been
initiated against the petitioner
under Section -7 of the Public
Demand Recovery Act on the
ground that the process is not
followed properly by the Bihar
State Food and Civil Supplies
Corporation (hereinafter referred
as BSFC for the sake of brevity) in
serving the notice, as the Form
no. 1 has not been properly made
and blank Certificate notice is
issued without application of
independent mind and without
proper verification and therefore it
is violation of the fundamental
right of the petitioner.
(iii) For issuance of writ in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the Certificate Case No.
61 of 2014-15 which has been
initiated against the petitioner
under the Public Demand
Recovery Act on the ground that
disputed amount cannot be
recovered through the Certificate
proceeding.
(iv) For issuance of writ in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the entire order sheet
and the final order dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.17139 of 2016 dt.18-03-2025
3/6
17.03.2016
passed in Certificate
case no. 61 of 2014-15 on the
ground that the same is without
hearing and without the proper
certificate or requisition under the
Public Demand Recovery Act,
1914 and thus the whole process
is without jurisdiction.
(v)For issuance of an
appropriate writ order/direction in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the final order dated
17.03.2016 passed in Certificate
case no. 61 of 2014-15 on the
ground that the same is passed
without following the principles of
natural justice.
(vi) For issuance of an
appropriate writ order/direction in
the nature of certiorari for
quashing the warrant of arrest
dated 10.06.2016 passed in
Certificate case no. 61 of 2014-15.
(vii) For the other reliefs
which may be granted to the
petitioner in the facts and
circumstances of this case."
2. During course of argument, the Learned
counsel for petitioner reports to this Court that
Annexure-10 is the Certificate Case which does not
contain the name of the District and the Section of
Law. It is further submitted that in Annexure-12,
column No. 1 has been kept vacant. There are
Patna High Court CWJC No.17139 of 2016 dt.18-03-2025
technical flaws in issuance of these certificatess and
the said fact is covered by judgment passed by this
Court in CWJC No. 8706 of 2016 (Panna Lal Das
Vs. State of Bihar).
3. On the other hand, the Learned counsel
for the respondents contended that the notice
(Annexure-9) contain the number and other relevant
details.
4. However, considering the technical flaws
pointed out by the petitioner, the certificate in
question can be treated as defective Certificate. The
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Nageshwar Prasad Singh vs. Rai
Bahadur Kashinath Singh reported in 1958 BLJR
820 as well as Badri Prasad Gupta Versus The
State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2018(3) PLJR
218 shall be applicable to the present facts and
circumstances of the case.
5. As regards the effect of a defective
Certificate on the validity of the Certificate
proceeding, the Division Bench of this Court in
Patna High Court CWJC No.17139 of 2016 dt.18-03-2025
Nageshwar Prasad Singh (supra) has observed
as follows:-
"The Certificate-Officer must
meticulously apply his mind to
filing the Certificate and filling in
the columns and blanks correctly
and in appending his Certificate in
the form prescribed, and that the
filling in of the forms is a matter of
substance and is imperative, to
give the Certificate the force of a
decree of court of law, and if it is
found that the Certificate-Officer
had not applied his mind at all and
that some of the blank spaces
were not filled up, or were
incorrectly filled up, the document
so prepared and filed is not a
Certificate under the Public
Demands Recovery Act. The
Certificate proceedings are wholly
invalid and the officer concerned
acts without jurisdiction"
6. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as the respondents and perused
the records.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17139 of 2016 dt.18-03-2025
7. In view of the fact that the present matter
is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgments, the
Writ application is allowed in light of the judgment
passed in Badri Prasad Gupta (supra).
Accordingly, Certificate Case No. 61 of 2014-15 is
hereby quashed. However, It will be open to the
respondents to initiate proceeding certificate afresh,
if permissible under the law.
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
vinita/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.03.2025
Transmission Date
