IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5551 of 2011 MAHENDRA RAM, SON OF LATE MADHURI RAM, RESIDENT OF VILAGE-ARARIYA, WARD NO.5, P.S.-ARARIYA, DISTRICT- ARARIYA. …… PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, THROUGH THE C.J.M., STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE AT PATNA. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, PURNEA. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA AT ARARIA BRANCH, ARARIA. 4. THE DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OFFICER, ARARIA. …… RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioner : M/s Bipin Bihari Singh & Vishwambhar Prasad, Advocates. For the respondent-Bank : Mr. K.K.Sinha, Advocate. --------- 04/ 10.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging notice issued by the Certificate Officer, Araria purporting to be under Section 9 of the Public Demands Recovery Act in Certificate Case No. 07/2009-10 communicating that in terms of notice under Section 7 of the Act issued earlier he did not turn up well within the time prescribed and as such by way of the further communicated notice and necessary information provided, he should pay to the bank the amount due by 24.1.2011 failing which order for seizure or the warrant of arrest shall be issued. It is stated that the impugned notice is against the factual and the legal position of the case and is in absence of any reasonable opportunity of hearing provided to the petitioner towards the - 2 - payment of the due amount. 3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition in order to file an appeal under Section 60 of the Act before the Collector of the District. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. However, if the petitioner files such an appeal with requisites before the said authority within fifteen days from today along with a copy of this order as well as an interlocutory application for condoning the delay, the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to the pendency of this writ petition and shall decide the appeal on merits expeditiously. Furthermore, if any interim order is sought by the petitioner, he may file interlocutory application before the appellate authority who shall also decide the same in accordance with law. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)