IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7487 of 2004 MD. ALI HUSSAIN @ ALI HUSSAIN, S/o late Md. Razaque, Resident of Mohalla Aliganj, P.S. Chandauti, P.O. Gaya, District-Gaya. ……..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Magistrate, Gaya 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Earlier Administrator, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya. 4. Rama Raman Prasad Singh, Executive Engineer, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya. 5. Vijay Kumar Prasad, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya (road sarkar). ……Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. O.P. Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhayay, Adv. For Corporation : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Adv. For the State : Mr. Anshuman Singh, Adv. ----------- 8/ 01.04.2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the reliefs, delineated in Paragraph 1 of the writ petition, which are reproduced hereinbelow: “ i) For quashing the notices issued by Chief Executive Officer, Gaya Municipal Corporation Gaya Respondent no. 3 herein to the 2 petitioner contained in Annexure 5 Series, directing the petitioner to adjust or deposit Rs.4,97,307 in the corporation Treasury G.M.C. Gaya by 10.02.2004 otherwise to face certificate case with cost of the case for recovery of the amount. ii) For directing the Distt. Magistrate Gaya, Respt. No. 2 to hold an enquiry into the racket involving the different works like construction of Harijan Awas in Gandi Basti, Gewal Bigha, construction of Nagmatia Road, (Gallery construction of Gandhi Maidan Stadium, etc. Boundary Constructions Painting work of Gandhi Maidan and Kalibari Road etc. iii) For a direction to respondent no. 3 herein to pay Rs.12,22,500/- to the petitioner. iv) Any other relief which may be 3 found just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, while assailing the validity and legality of the notices contained in Annexure 5 series dated 27.01.2004, submits that as a matter of fact, he is not the contractor and no amount was advanced to him by Gaya Municipal Corporation or its officials for execution of certain works. In the same vein, it is submitted that, as a matter of fact, at best, he can be termed as a petty contractor, and respondent no. 5 is the actual contractor, who was made such advance by the Corporation. Therefore, in his submission, if any amount is due that can be realised from respondent no. 5, but not from the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-Gaya Municipal Corporation and its officials, while opposing the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, submits that if the petitioner was aggrieved with the notices impugned herein, then he could have submitted 4 his show cause before the prescribed authority and could have denied his liability. 5. With respect to relief no. 2, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a matter of fact, there has been racket in construction of Harijan Awas in Gandi Basti, Gewal Bigha in the town of Gaya and the officials of Gaya Municipal Corporation in collusion with the contractor have swindled away huge amount of government fund and entire matter requires to be enquired into either by respondent-District Magistrate, Gaya or by some other competent authority. 6. Admittedly, counter affidavit has not been filed by any of the official-respondents disputing the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made in the writ petition. 7. After having heard the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending any longer in this Court, since matters are required to be looked into by some competent officials and final decisions are required to be 5 taken by them. Therefore, with respect to relief no.1, raising validity or otherwise of the impugned notices contained in Annexure 5 series, the petitioner is hereby directed to file his show cause before the Municipal Commissioner, Gaya Municipal Corporation (in short Corporation). If the matter is still pending and no further action has been taken by the Corporation for initiation of certificate proceeding, then the Municipal Commissioner shall be obliged to decide the claim raised on behalf of the petitioner. However, if a certificate proceeding has been started for realization of the amount, which is subject matter in the impugned notice, then the petitioner shall be well advised to file his objection petition under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 denying his liability, whereafter certificate officer shall be obliged to decide the same in accordance with law. 8. So far as other reliefs are concerned, the petitioner is hereby directed to file a detailed representation before respondent-District 6 Magistrate, Gaya, who shall look into the grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner, and if need be, he shall take consequential action against the guilty officials including the respondents in the present proceeding. 9. The petitioner shall file his separate representations regarding the grievances raised in the present petition, as indicated above, before respondent-District Magistrate, Gaya, as also before Municipal Commissioner of Corporation, or the certificate officer, as the case may be, within a period of four weeks from today with a certified copy of the present order, whereafter the authority concerned shall be obliged to consider the grievance raised therein. Endeavour shall be made to take final decision as early as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation along with a certified copy of the present order. 10. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear before the prescribed authority, as indicated above, within the time prescribed by 7 this Court with a representation along with a certified copy of the present order, then it shall be construed that the present writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)