Judgment M.Y.Eqbal, J. 1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the entire certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No.MVT 499 of 1994-95 including the order dated 16.10.97 as contained in Annexure 3 to the writ application. 2. The petitioners case is that she is an old widow of late Kali Prasad Agrawal who died on 23.5.83. When the petitioner was out of station in the month of June, 96 she learnt that notice of the certificate proceeding in the name of her late husband was posted at her door. She made enquiry and got the relevant documents from the concerned office. She came to know that for the arrears of motor vehicle tax in respect of truck No.BHR 6719 for the period from 1.7.78 to 31.3.93 a certificate proceeding was initiated against her late husband on 21.6.93. Petitioners further case is that she in good faith filed an application before the respondent no.2, the Certificate Officer on 7.8.96 stating true state of affairs and prayed to drop the proceeding on the ground that the proceeding against a dead person was not maintainable. It is alleged that the Certificate Officer, without verifying the legal position in terms of the impugned order dated 16.10.97 rejected the petition of the petitioner treating it to be an objection and directed the petitioner to deposit the amount by 31.10.97, failing which distress warrant will be issued. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.3 stating, inter alia, that the husband of the petitioner was the owner of truck No.BHR 6719 and no tax and additional tax were paid by him since 1.7.78. Due to non-payment of tax a requisition was issued by the District Transport Officer in 1995 for recovery of Rs.1,37,608.44 paise from the late husband of the petitioner. It is further stated that the case was filed against Kali Prasad Agrawal whose name still stands in the R.C.ook of the vehicle. It is further stated that the owner of the vehicle died on 23.5.83 but the Transport Department was not intimated about his death and his name continued in the owner book. After the death of Kali Prasad the legal heir of dead person should have got his vehicle transferred in her name. 4. I have heard Mr. It is further stated that the owner of the vehicle died on 23.5.83 but the Transport Department was not intimated about his death and his name continued in the owner book. After the death of Kali Prasad the legal heir of dead person should have got his vehicle transferred in her name. 4. I have heard Mr. A.K.Lal learned counsel for the petitioner and learned JC to GA. 5. Mr.Lal assailed the impugned order as being iflegal and wholly without jurisdiction. Learned counsel submitted that the certificate proceeding initiated against a dead person is vitiated in law. In this connection, learned counsel has drawn my attention to Section 52 of the Public Demand Recovery Act and also the rules and instructions issued by the Board of Revenue under the Act. 6. Admittedly, the late husband of the petitioner was the owner of the vehicle in question and he died on 23.5.83. It has not been disputed by the respondents that a requisition was issued on the basis of which a certificate proceeding was initiated against a dead person. The question, therefore, falls for consideration is whether a certificate proceeding initiated against a dead person will continue against heirs and legal representatives of the deceased, In this connection, Section 52 of the Act is necessary to be looked into, which reads as under: "52. Procedure on death of certificate-debtor.(1) Where certificate debtor dies before the certificate has been fully satisfied, the Certificate Officer may, after serving upon the legal representative of the deceased a notice in the prescribed form proceed to execute the certificate against such legal representative; and the provisions of the Act shall apply as if such legal representative were the certificate-debtor and as if such notice were a notice under Section 7: Provided that where the certificate is executed against such legal representative, he shall be liable only to the extent of the property of the deceased which has come to his hands and has not been duly disposed of; and, for the purpose of ascertaining such liability, the Certificate Officer executing the certificate may, of his own motion or on the application of the certificate-holder, compel such legal representative to produce such accounts as the Certificate Officer thinks fit." 7. From perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is clear that the provision is applicable to cases where the certificate-debtor dies before signing of the certificate. From perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is clear that the provision is applicable to cases where the certificate-debtor dies before signing of the certificate. This Section is attracted where the certificate debtor dies after certificate is issued but before the certificate has been cy of the certificate proceeding then the certificate officer can proceed against the legal representatives of the deceased brought on the record and after serving them notice as prescribed under the Act. This section does not confer power to the certificate officer to continue the proceeding against the legal representatives even if the certificate proceeding was initiated against the dead person. To clarify this position, the Board of Revenue have issued instructions. Clause 20 of the Boards instruction reads as under: "20. Procedure to be followed when a certificate-debtor dies before or after the certificate is made.Section. 52 of the Act lays down the procedure to be followed when a certificate-debtor dies at any time after the signing of the certificate. If the debtor has died before the certificate is signed the certificate is void, and a fresh certificate must be made against the legal representative of the deceased. The initiative, where the sum is payable to the Collector originally, should rest with the Certificate Officer, for in such a case no requisition is needed. In a demand of this nature the Certificate Officer when striking off for due reason a case, the demand in which has not been fuily realised or remitted should promptly sign a fresh properly prepared certificate for the realisation of such demand and at the same time send intimation to the Requiring Officer for note in his Register. Where the demand is not payable to the District Collector originally, the initiative lies with the authority who made the original requisition." 8. Where the demand is not payable to the District Collector originally, the initiative lies with the authority who made the original requisition." 8. It is, therefore, clear that if the certificate is signed after the death of certificate-debtor then the certificate is void and a fresh certificate must be made against the legal representative of the deceased.in that view of matter, in my opinion when, admittedly, late husband of the petitioner died before the certificate was signed, entire certificate proceeding is void and Certificate Officer has no jurisdiction to continue the certificate proceeding against the petitioner unless a fresh certificate is signed and a proceeding is initiated against the legal representatives of the deceased or against any person, who is in custody and possession of the vehicle. 9. For the reason aforesaid, this writ application is allowed and the entire certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No. MVT 499 of 1994-95 and the impugned order dated 16.10.97 are hereby quashed. However, the respondents-authorities are at liberty to initiate a fresh certificate proceeding against the legal representative of the deceased or against any person, who is in custody and possession of the vehicle.