IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7575 of 2006 Madan Ram, son of Shri Chhakauri Ram, resident of Village Hardiachak, P.O. Narkatiaganj, P.S. Shikarpur, District-West Champaran ----- Petitioner. Versus 1. Central Bank Of India, Shikarpur (Narkatiaganj) through its Branch Manager 2. Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Shikarpur, Narkatiaganj. 3. The State of Bihar through Certificate Officer, Bettiah, Bihar ----- Respondents. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, A.C. to G.A.VIII. -------- 2. 20.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the respondent and learned counsel for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 30.1.2006 passed in Certificate Case No.1 of 2005 by which the Certificate Officer rejected the objection filed by the petitioner and issued warrant of arrest. 3. This writ petition had been filed in July, 2006 but till date there is nothing on the record to show as to what action has been taken against him. However, from the facts raised in the pleadings, it is quite apparent that notice under Section 7 of the 2 Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued after initiation of the aforesaid certificate proceeding and the petitioner filed objection under Section 9 of the Act and the said objection has been rejected vide order dated 30.1.2006. 4. Against such an order a provision of appeal has specifically been made in the Act, but instead of utilizing the said remedy available to the petitioner he has filed this writ petition which can not be entertained due to availability of a more appropriate and efficacious remedy by way of appeal where all the questions of facts placed by the parties could be thrashed out on the basis of the materials. 5. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before an appropriate authority. If such an appeal is filed by the petitioner within 15 days from today along with an interlocutory application for condoning the delay and a copy of this order the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to the pendency of the writ petition and shall decide the appeal of the petitioner on 3 merits in accordance with law expeditiously. Vinay/ ( S. N. Hussain, J.)