Disposed

Ranjeet Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Aug 2026CWJC/12281/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order disposing of a writ petition seeking quashing of proceedings and notices under the Public Demands Recovery Act. The court directed the appropriate authority to decide the pending petition expeditiously without coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the appropriate authority to consider and decide the petition filed under Section 9 of the Act within two months without taking coercive steps.

Ranjeet Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12281 of 2026

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Ranjeet Prasad S/o Sri Prabhu Prasad, Resident of Ward No.8, Kesharia, PO and P.S.-Kesharia, District-East Champaran, Bihar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar Bihar.

¶7

The District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.

¶8

The Additional Collector-cum-Certificate Officer, East Champaran at Motihari.

¶9

The District Sub-Registrar, East Champaran at Motihari.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Awnish Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (17) ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRIJISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 13-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed

¶15

for the following relief(s):-

¶16

“(I) … in the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the entire proceeding of Certificate Case No. 66/Stamp/24-25 pending in the Court of Respondent No. 3 on the ground that the said proceeding of the certificate case is hopelessly barred by law of limitation.

¶17

(II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the last notice dated 23.06.2026 issued under the signature of respondent no. 3 under Form 17 of the Public Demand and Recovery Act whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been called upon to show cause till 21.07.2026 as to why he should not be arrested and remanded to civil prison in the execution of Certificate Case No.66/Stamp/24-25.

¶18

(III) For a declaration that if after

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.12281 of 2026(2) dt.13-08-2026 2/4

¶20

receipt of a notice under Section 7 of the Public Demand Recovery Act, the petitioner has already filed his objection under Section 9 of the Act on 23.05.2025, the respondent no.3 was not at all justified to issue impugned notice in execution of the certificate proceeding without deciding the objection filed by the writ petitioner.

¶21

(IV) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the petitioner would be found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶22

It is not in dispute that petition under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter refereed to as “the Act”) is pending consideration/petitioner intends to file before the appropriate authority.

¶23

Learned counsel for the parties jointly pray that the instant petition be disposed of with direction to the appropriate authority to consider and decide the same expeditiously.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State states that the appropriate authority shall consider and decide the petition filed/to be filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Act positively within a period of two months from the date of appearance of the petitioner before him along with a copy of this order and the issue of limitation shall not come in the way

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.12281 of 2026(2) dt.13-08-2026 3/4

¶26

of decision on merits.

¶27

Statement of both the parties are accepted and taken

¶28

on record.

¶29

As such, petition stands disposed of in the following terms:-

¶30

(a) Petitioner shall appear in the office of the appropriate authority on 10.09.2026 along with a copy of this order, on which date documents in support of the petition shall be filed, or else file a fresh petition under Section 9 of the Act.

¶31

(b). The appropriate authority shall consider and dispose of the petitioner’s petition expeditiously, by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of two month from the date of appearance of the petitioner before him and till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

¶32

(c). The authority shall also examine as to whether the amount in question falls within the definition of public demand or not;

¶33

(d) The authority shall also examine all issues including question of fact and law;

¶34

(e) Needless to add, while considering such petition, principles of natural justice shall be followed and due opportunity of hearing as also leading evidences has to be

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.12281 of 2026(2) dt.13-08-2026 4/4

¶36

afforded to the parties;

¶37

(f) Order assigning reasons shall be supplied to the

¶38

parties;

¶39

(g) Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law;

¶40

(h) I am hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch;

¶41

(i) Liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the appropriate authority, before the appropriate forum, if so required and desired.

¶42

(j) I have not expressed any opinion on the merits. All issues are left open;

¶43

The writ application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶44

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶45

(Girijish Kumar, J)

¶46

dhaneshwar/- U

Ranjeet Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yaduvansham Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Jv Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Rajak @ Pradeep Kumar Rajak Vs The State of Bihar

Sangita Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Rite Water Solutions (India) Ltd. Vs The State of Bihar

Mumtaz @ Md. Mumtaz @ Md. Mumtaz Miya @ Mumtaz Miya Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar Vs Union Bank of India