IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12637 of 2007 MD.SHOAIB, son of Wahab, Resident of Mohalla – Kalibagh, Bettiah, P.O. + P.S. Bettiah Town, District – West Champaran. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, at Bettiah. 3. The District Certificate Officer, West Champaran, at Bettiah. 4. The District Transport Officer, West Champaran, at Bettiah. ----------- 03. 4.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner wants quashing of Certificate Case No. 54 of 2006-07 under the stated circumstances. A claim of Rs.3,64,248/- has been raised against the petitioner as road tax dues for Truck No. BR 22A/0029. Petitioner is stated to be the owner of the said truck. The demand is for the period July 2000 till 30th June, 2006. Contention of the petitioner is based upon the evidences that there is no substantive basis to demand road tax dues for the period in question because road tax had been paid by the petitioner right up till 30th June, 2002. If only the District Transport Officer had verified the records this aspect would have emerged. Even before the expiry of the period of road tax on 30.6.2002 the truck of the petitioner was seized by the forest officials on 8.4.2002. Various proceedings came to be drawn up. The truck in question became part of a confiscation proceeding as well but when the petitioner moved the High Court in CWJC No. 11938 of 2005, the High Court 2 taking the entirety of the dispute vide order dated 3.7.2006 ordered release of the truck. The order is Annexure-3 to the writ application. The truck thereafter came to be released on 17.8.2006. In the meantime, the present certificate case for demand of road tax came to be instituted. Petitioner appeared. He brought all these facts to the notice of the Certificate Officer but in absence of response from the office of the DTO as well as DFO, the proceeding has not gone beyond the last order which was recorded on 28.9.2006. Mere non-cooperation on the part of the official respondents is causing hindrance in getting justice for the petitioner before the Certificate Officer. With basic material and evidence available on the record which does go to the root of the matter that the requisition has not been filed after proper verification of records with regard to payment of road tax and that the vehicle of the petitioner was off-road as it was seized by the official respondents in April, 2002 and released only in the year 2006 on the intervention of the High Court. These are matters which is required to be taken into consideration of the Certificate Officer. If the concerned District Transport authorities of the district and forest officials are not cooperating in the certificate proceeding, the Certificate Officer will be well advised to take all the materials and 3 evidence filed by the petitioner on record, decide the objection of the petitioner and then pass appropriate reasoned order in this regard. The writ application stands disposed of. Till such a decision is taken, no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J )