ORDER : 1. The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein order dated 22.07.2017 is under challenge, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,51,131/-in order to Electricity/2008-09. 2. Mr. P.S.A. Swaroop Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner submits by referring to the order-sheet of the aforesaid certificate case that in terms of notice issued under section 7 of Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914, he has appeared before the certificate officer and file objection as stipulated under Section 9 of the aforesaid Act. Although thereafter, regular appearance was not there and after substantial delay, the orders have been passed for issuance of warrant on 19.06.2018 for execution the certificate dated 22.07.2017 and as such it has been argued that even accepting that the regular appearance was not there but objection under Section 9 of the aforesaid Act was there. Therefore, the certificate officer ought to have adjudicated upon on the basis of the objection made by the petitioner under Section 9 but without doing so the certificate of the same amount has been issued on 22.07.2017 and after considerable delay, the warrant has been directed to be issued for its execution. In support thereof, submission has been made that the certificate officer may be directed to consider the aforesaid objection. 3. Mr. Navin Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the JUVNL submits that it is not in dispute that if an objection under Section 9 is filed before the certificate officer the same is to be adjudicated upon but it has not been adjudicated, therefore, an order under Section 10 of the Act is required to be passed before issuance of the certificate for recovery of the amount pertaining to public demand. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of their rival submissions, it is evident from the order-sheet pertaining to Certificate Case No.252/Electricity/2008-09 that a requisition has been made by the respondents-Corporation for relisation of amount Rs.5,51,131/-after its receipt, the certificate officer has issued notice under Section 7 of the Act asking the petitioner to file its objection as contemplated under Section 9 of the aforesaid Act. 5. 5. It is evident from the order dated 12.08.2009 that the aforesaid objection has been filed by the petitioner but the same has not been taken care of since no order has been passed under Section 10 being not reflected in the order dated 22.07.2017. It is settled position of law that if statute provides a thing to be done the same is to be done on the basis of the same. 6. Admittedly Section 7 provides for issuance of notice upon the certificate holder and Section 9 provides an opportunity to file objection and thereafter on adjudication, an order is required to be passed by the certificate officer under Section 10 of the aforesaid Act but no order has been passed under Section 10. Therefore, the certificate officer has failed to exercising its duty in terms of the statutory provision as provided under the Act, 1914. 7. In view thereof, the order dated 22.07.2017 alongwith the order dated 19.06.2018 are quashed and in consequence thereof, the matter is remitted before the certificate officer for passing fresh order upon considering the objection made under Section 9 of the Act which is already available on record and take decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and take consequential action. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.