ORDER Satish Chandra, C. J. -The State Electricity Board, U. P. made an application to the learned Civil Judge, praying that the arbitration proceedings pending between the parties be directed to abate. The learned Civil Judge accepted the submission and abated the proceedings under Section 5 of the U. P. Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) (Amendment) Act (No. 17 of 1975). Aggrieved. the plaintiff has come to this court in revision. 2. It appears that the plaintiff had entered into an agreement with the State Electricity Board for supply of electricity. Disputes having arisen, they were referred to arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause in the agreement. The Uttar Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) (Amendment) Act, 1975 (Act No. 17 of 1975) provided for abatement of suits, applications and arbitration proceedings of the nature referred to in sub-section (5) of Section 3. Section 5 provides. "5. All suits, applications and arbitration proceedings of the nature referred to in sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the principal Act as inserted by this Act, pending immediately before the commencement of this Act shall abate upon the commencement of this Act.........." 3. Sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the principal Act refers to a certificate sent to the Collector under sub-section (1) and provided that such certificate shall be final and shall not be called in question in any original suits, application or in any reference to arbitration. Thus, the pending arbitration proceedings which are liable to abate are such which relate to a certificate issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3, Sub-section (1) of Section 3 provides for four contingencies mentioned in Cls. (a), (b), (c) and (d) and under which a default having committed, a certificate can be issued to the Collector. It is not disputed that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the subsection are not applicable to the present case. Reliance has been placed on Cl. (d) which runs as follows: "Where any person is party, (a) to (c) .......... (a), (b), (c) and (d) and under which a default having committed, a certificate can be issued to the Collector. It is not disputed that Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the subsection are not applicable to the present case. Reliance has been placed on Cl. (d) which runs as follows: "Where any person is party, (a) to (c) .......... (d) to any agreement providing that any money payable thereunder to the State Government or the corporation shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue: and such person- (i) makes any default in repayment of the loan or advance or any instalment thereof; or (ii) having become liable under the conditions of the grant to refund the grant or any portion thereof, makes any default in the refund of such grant or portion or any instalment thereof; or (iii) otherwise fails to comply with the terms of the agreement, then, in the case of the State Government may send a certificate to the collector, mentioning the sum due from such person and requesting that such sum together with costs of the proceedings be recovered as if it were an arrear of land revenue." 4. It will thus be seen that sub-section (d) applies to a case where the agreement between the parties provides that any money payable thereunder shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Clause (d) obviously cannot apply to an agreement when there is no such clause. In the present case, it is not disputed that the agreement between the parties did not contain the clause that any money payable thereunder shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue. 5. It is thus apparent that sub-sec. (1) [of Section 3 not being applicable sub-section (5) will equally not apply, and so Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) (Amendment) Act, 1976 will not be attracted to the arbitration proceedings pending between the parties. Hence they could not be abated under these provisions. 6. The U. P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958 provides for issuance of a certificate if the dues for which a notice of demand has been served, have not been deposited with the Prescribed Authority within 30 days of the notice. Hence they could not be abated under these provisions. 6. The U. P. Government Electrical Undertakings (Dues Recovery) Act, 1958 provides for issuance of a certificate if the dues for which a notice of demand has been served, have not been deposited with the Prescribed Authority within 30 days of the notice. Such dues, under Section 5 of this act are recoverable as arrears of land revenue, anything contained in any other law or instrument or agreement to the contrary notwithstanding. I am informed that in the present case, a certificate of recovery was issued somewhere in June 1974. This provision however, does not make any provision for abatement of pending arbitration proceedings even though a certificate may have been issued. The position is that if a certificate has been issued under Section 5 of the 1958 Act, it may enable the State Electricity Board to recover the money as arrears ot land revenue, but that is a far cry from saying that the arbitration proceedings must abate. 7. Reliance was placed upon Section 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Money (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972, as amended by Act No. 17 of 1975. This provision validates action taken between December, 4 1975 and the commencement of the Act in December, 1975. During this period the certificate was issued. So the certificate may be valid notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order. But again that does not mean that pending arbitration proceedings must abate. They can abate only under the provisions of Section 5 of Act 17 of 1975 in cases where sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the Act is applicable. As already seen, those provisions are not attracted in this case. Those proceedings cannot hence be abated. 8. In the result, the revision succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The applicant will be entitled to costs.