IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3490 of 2006 Binod Singh, son of Baban Singh, resident of village Pahariha, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Bhabhua …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Collector, Kaimur 3. District Mining Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram 4. District Mining Officer, Kaimur, Sasaram 5. District Certificate Officer, Kaimur at Bhabhua 6. Certificate Officer, Mines, Magadh Anchal, Gaya --------- For the Petitioner : M/s Mahesh Prasad No.2 and Rewtikant Raman, Advocates For the Respondents: None --------- 04/ 29.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging entire proceeding of Certificate Case No. 02 of 1993-94 pending before the Certificate Officer against him for realizing Rs.4,296.50 on the basis of requisition for realization of the said dues of the year 1990-91 by the Assistant Mining Officer, Rohtas. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that entire proceeding is absolutely frivolous because he had already paid all the dues and the proceeding has been initiated only to harass the petitioner and for some nefarious design of the authorities concerned. He further submits that the notice was issued under section 7 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act’ for the sake of brevity) on 23.08.1993 and on that day warrant had been issued but the said notice was not served upon the petitioner and as soon as he learnt 2 about the said proceeding, he filed this writ petition. He also submits that no opportunity for filing any objection under section 9 of the Act had been given nor any order under section 10 of the Act has been passed by the authorities concerned, but inspite of that coercive action has been unnecessarily initiated against the petitioner. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the above mentioned Certificate Officer along with a copy of this order within one month with his objection under section 9 of the Act, if not yet filed, whereafter the said authority shall pass an appropriate order deciding the said matter expeditiously and if the petitioner feels aggrieved by that order, he will be at liberty to challenge the same before an appropriate forum provided under the Act. 5. Till such an order under section 10 of the Act is passed, if not yet passed, respondent-authorities shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J.)