Allowed

Amarendra Kumar and Anr. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC12 Dec 2013CWJC/9208/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order allowing a writ petition where the court quashed a certificate proceeding because a new Certificate Officer failed to initiate fresh proceedings after assuming charge, relying on prior judgments.

What did the court decide?

Certificate Case No.67 of 2002 and all subsequent actions taken thereon are quashed with liberty to the Corporation to take fresh legal steps.

Amarendra Kumar and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2013) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9208 of 2006

¶3

====================================================== 1. Amarendra Kumar, S/o Shri Dhanraj Singh, Raj Niketan, Mohanpur, Punaichak, P.S. Shastri Nagar, Patna 800023.

¶4

1. Alok Kumar, S/o Shri Dhanraj Singh, Raj Niketan, Mohanpur, Punaichak, P.S. Shastri Nagar, Patna 800023. .... .... Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. State Of Bihar through its Chief Secretary. 2. The Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Ltd., Indira Bhawan, 4^th Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Patna-800001 through its Managing Director.

¶7

1. The Certificate Officer, Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Ltd., Indira Bhawan, 4^th Floor, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Patna-800001.

¶8

1. The Collector, Patna. 5. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

¶9

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. R.A.Singh Mr. Amod Kumar, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Advocate

¶10

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

6 12-12-2013 In view of the facts emerging from the case, and not controverted in the counter affidavit, that after change of the Certificate Officer, no fresh requisition was made by the Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Corporation”) and no fresh proceeding was initiated by the new Certificate Officer against the debtors, no detailed judgment is required in this case.

¶12

Certificate Case No.67 of 2002 was initiated against petitioners and others by the Corporation by filing a requisition with Law Officer of the Corporation designated as Certificate

¶13

Patna High Court CWJC No.9208 of 2006 (6) dt.12-12-2013

¶14

2/3

¶15

Officer. Appointment of Law Officer as Certificate Officer by the Corporation came under challenge before this Court in the case of M/s Shobha Coir Foam Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar & others [2006 (2)PLJR 571]. The learned Single Judge of this Court, by his order dated 18.04.2006, held his appointment bad. The learned Judge also held that appointment of a competent Certificate Officer did not validate the pending proceeding by application of doctrine of de facto. The writ application of the petitioner was

¶16

allowed.

¶17

In the present case also, certificate proceeding was initiated before the same Law Officer acting as Certificate Officer. The Certificate Officer was subsequently changed and an Officer of the Government was appointed as Certificate Officer. However, from the notice contained in Annexure-13, and the certificate issued by the new Certificate Officer enclosed therewith, it is apparent that he had issued certificate in the same old proceeding which makes it obvious that after change of the Certificate Officer, Corporation did not file any fresh requisition giving rise to any fresh proceeding. This invalidates the entire proceeding and the impugned notice. This issue has been considered by this Court also in its recent order dated 21.11.2013 passed in CWJC No.6711 of 2006 and other analogous cases.

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.9208 of 2006 (6) dt.12-12-2013

¶19

3/3

¶20

In the circumstances, following the said two orders of this Court, as noticed above, this application is allowed. Certificate Case No.67 of 2002 pending before the Certificate Officer of the Corporation and all the subsequent actions taken in the matter are quashed. The Corporation shall be at liberty to take fresh steps in accordance with law for realization of its dues against the petitioners.

¶21

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

¶22

B.T/-

Amarendra Kumar and Anr. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarendra Kumar and Anr. v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uma Shankar Pd. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chabilal Yadav Vs Mr. Deva Nand Kunwar the Chanc

Dr. Sangeet Kumar Verma Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjay Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Abdul Jabbar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Elite Family Restaurant Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.