Smt.Shanti Singh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Smt.Shanti Singh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioners to deposit 40% of the certified dues before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks; on such deposit the Commissioner's order dated 06.03.2007 in Certificate Revision No. 376 of 1996 shall stand set aside and a fresh order on the merits of the Revision shall be passed after hearing the parties afresh; failing the deposit, the order dated 06.03.2007 shall stand confirmed.

Issue for consideration

Whether liberty should be given to the petitioners to deposit the 40% of the certified dues (required under Section 62 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914) before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to deposit 40% of the certified dues before the respondent no.2 – Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, within twelve weeks.

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioners deposit 40% of the certified dues before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks from the date of the order, the order dated 06.03.2007 passed by the Commissioner in Certificate Revision No. 376 of 1996 shall stand set aside, and the Commissioner is directed to pass a fresh order on the merits of the Revision after hearing the parties to the revision afresh, without being influenced by this order.

Key takeaways

If the petitioners fail to deposit 40% of the certified dues before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks from the date of the order, the order dated 06.03.2007 passed by the respondent no.2 – Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi shall stand confirmed.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P. (C) No. 465 of 2008, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi — Anil Kumar Choudhary, J., order dated 12th July, 2024) disposed of with liberty to the three petitioners to deposit 40% of the certified dues, as required under Section 62 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914, before the respondent no.2 – Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, within twelve weeks. On such deposit, the Commissioner's order dated 06.03.2007 in Certificate Revision No. 376 of 1996 — which had declined to entertain the revision on merit solely because of failure to deposit the 40% — shall stand set aside, and the Commissioner is directed to pass a fresh order on the merits of the Revision after hearing the parties afresh, without being influenced by this order; failing the deposit within twelve weeks, the order dated 06.03.2007 shall stand confirmed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 465 of 2008

Smt. Shanti Singh, wife of Sri N.K. Singh, resident of Doranda, P.O.

& P.S. –Doranda, Town & District –Ranchi.

Smt. Mahmuda Khatoon, wife of Rustam Ali, resident of Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. –Jagarnathpur, Town & District –Ranchi.

Smt. Zinnatunissa, wife of Sk. Muzammil, resident of Dhurwa, P.O. –Dhurwa, P.S. –Jagarnathpur, Town & District –Ranchi.

.... Petitioners

Versus

State of Jharkhand.

Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi.

Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi.

Certificate Officer, Ranchi.

Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Eastern Circle, Ranchi.

…. Respondents

P R E S E N T

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioners : Ms. Shobha Rani, Advocate : Mr. Niraj Kishore, Advocate For the Resp-State : Mr. Sreenu Garapati, SC-III : Mr. Shivam Anand Pathak, AC to SC-III

By the Court:-

Heard the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners modifies their prayer and submits that because of paucity of money, the petitioners could not deposit 40% of the amount as required under Section 62 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 and now the petitioners are ready and willing to deposit the same. Hence, it is submitted that

W.P. (C) No.465 of 2008

1

liberty may be given to the petitioners to deposit the said amount before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi.

Perusal of the record reveals that the respondent no.2 did not entertain the revision filed by the petitioners on merit, only because of failure of the petitioners to deposit 40% of the certified dues.

The learned counsel for the State submits that if the petitioners are ready and willing to deposit 40% of the certified dues then the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi may be directed to consider the Certificate Revision No. 376/1996 on merit.

Considering the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to deposit 40% of the certified dues before the respondent no.2 –Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks.

In case the petitioners deposit 40% of the certified dues before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks from the date of this order, then the order dated 06.03.2007, passed by the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi in Certificate Revision No. 376 of 1996 shall stand set aside and the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi is directed to pass a fresh order on the merits of the Revision, after hearing the parties to the revision afresh; without being influenced by this Order.

W.P. (C) No.465 of 2008

2

In case, the petitioners fail to deposit 40% of the certified dues before the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi within twelve weeks from the date of this order, then the order dated 06.03.2007, passed by the respondent no.2 –Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi shall stand confirmed.

This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioners.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 12^th July, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-

W.P. (C) No.465 of 2008

3