Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 398 (PAT)

Ramji Mishra v. State Of Bihar

2003-04-07

AFTAB ALAM

body2003
Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Singh, counsel representing the Begusarai Municipality. 2. The petitioner is the President of the Bihar State Ex-services League, District Branch, Begusarai and in that capacity he is facing a proceeding under the Bihar Public Demands Recovery Act in Certifcate Case No. 35 of 2001-02 pending before the District Certificate Officer, Begusarai. The Certificate case has been instituted on the basis of a requisition for a sum of Rs. 14,60,270.85 paise issued by the Begusarai Municipality for recovery of its dues under the agreement for settlement of Begusarai Municipal Bus stand. It appears that the District Branch of the League took settlement of the Begusarai Bus Stand for collection of tolls for a number of years but it failed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10 lacs and odd for the settlement year 1999-2000 and a further sum of Rs. 4 lacs and odd for the settlement year 2000-2001 (adding up to a total sum of Rs 14,60,270.85 paise). It is for the recovery of this money that the certificate case is instituted at the instance of the municipality. The objections filed by the petitioner under section 9 of the Act stand rejected by the Certificate Officer by orders, dated 30.8.2002 and 8.10.2002 and though the petitioner purported to file an appeal against the orders passed by the Certificate Officer, it remains unentertained and dormant for want of deposit of 40% of the requisition amount. In these circumstances, the petitioner has come to this court challenging the institution of the Certificate case and the orders passed in the case. 3. Counsel for the petitioner made a number of submissions assailing the institution of the Certificate case against the petitioner, in his capacity as the President of the District Ex-services League for the recovery of the dues of the Begusarai Municipality. Learned counsel submitted that the Ex-services League was a Society registered under the Bihar and Orissa Societies Registration Act and placing reliance upon clause 61 of the bye-laws of the Society, he contended that in any case, for or against the Society, it could be represented by the General Secretary and not by the President. 4. Having regard to the present position of the league, as stated by the petitioner himself, I find the submission completely misconceived. 4. Having regard to the present position of the league, as stated by the petitioner himself, I find the submission completely misconceived. On the petitioners own showing (see paragraph 20 of the writ petition) all the office bearers of the District branch of the League had tendered resignation and the petitioner had assumed the office of the President for carrying on the work of the League. It further appears that he personally executed the agreement with the Begusarai Municipality, describing himself self as the President of the District League. It is evident that in the execution of the agreement hardly any provisions of the bye-laws of the Society were followed inasmuch as there is no evidence of any sanction of the agreement by the Executive Committee or its approval by the Managing Committee of the Society; presumably, these Committees are no longer in existence and the district branch of the league is being run by the petitioner alone as its President. For all these reasons, there appears to be hardly any scope for the petitioner to hide behind the technical pleas raised on the basis of the provisions of the Societys bye-laws. 5. Be that as it may. it is undeniable that the settlement was made in favour of the Ex-services League and the petitioner had executed the agreement in his capacity as the President of the District Branch of the League. Aiso, in the certificate issued by the Certificate Officer, a copy of which is at Annexure-3, the petitioner is described as the President of the Ex-services League. That being the position, the Society alone can be held liable for the recovery of the dues and for the recovery of the dues action may be taken against properties belonging to the Society. In the facts and circumstances of the case, any coercive measures against the person or personal property of the petitioner can be hardly said to be justified. See Kanhaiya Lal V/s. State of Bihar and others, 2002 (2) P.L.J.R. 553 . 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, any coercive measures against the person or personal property of the petitioner can be hardly said to be justified. See Kanhaiya Lal V/s. State of Bihar and others, 2002 (2) P.L.J.R. 553 . 6. On hearing counsel for the petitioner and on going through the writ petition, the counter affidavit and the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Certificate Officer to recall the distress warrant, if any, issued against the petitioner personally and to proceed to realise the certificate amount from the properties, if any, belonging to the Ex-services League. If the District branch of the League does not have any property of its own it will be open to the Certificate officer to proceed against the properties of the Ex-services League at its Headquarters. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.