IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4241 of 2009 SRI ANIL KUMAR, S/o- Chhathu Choudhary, R/o- Shivam Apartment, Boring Road, Patna :--- Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Labour, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Certificate Officer-cum-District Panchayat Raj Officer, Patna, Collecorate, Patna,Bihar. 3. Sri Jagdish Jha, Son of Lakhan Lal Jha, North Patel Nagar, Mithelesh Colony, P.O.- Keshri Nagar, Patna-24 :--- Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : M/S Mrigank Mauli, Vinay Mistry & Anil Kumar Singh, Advocates For the State :- Mr. Atul Kumar Pandey, S.C.-10. ====== 5. 05.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is the Director of M/s Patliputra Builders Private Ltd. and has been substituted in the certificate proceedings in place of M/s Newspapers and Publication Limited in view of a tripartite agreement executed by and between the Newspapers Publication Limited, Employees Union of the Newspapers Publication Limited and the Patliputra Builders Private Limited. Pursuant to the substitution a warrant of attachment has also been issued against the petitioner as in terms of the tripartite agreement M/s Patliputra Builders Private Ltd had undertaken to clear all the dues of the workers of M/s Newspapers and Publication Limited to the extent of 8.5 crores. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the certificate proceeding has been initiated to execute the award passed by Labour Court on the application of one Sri Jagdish Jha in whose favour award was made by the Labour Court. In this connection it is further pointed out that Sri Jagdish Jha himself under application dated 8.10.2007 (Annexure-6) filed before the certificate officer submitted - 2 - that he being not a party to the tripartite agreement is not bound by the contents of the tripartite agreement. In these circumstances it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the certificate proceeding he could not be substituted in place of M/s Newspapers and Publication Ltd. to pay the dues of Sri Jagdish Jha as he himself has contended before the Certificate Officer that he is not bound by the tripartite agreement. Substitution of the petitioner in the certificate proceedings including issue of warrant of attachment have been made without permitting the petitioner opportunity to file objection under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act (hereinafter referred to as the “P.D.R.Act”). 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I dispose of this writ application directing the petitioner to file his objection before the Certificate Officer in terms of the provisions contained in Section 9 of the P.D.R. Act which should be considered in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the objection under Section 9 of the P.D.R. Act. Interim order dated 07.04.2009 passed in the instant case is recalled. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)