Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1121 (JHR)

Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand, through its Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology, Ranchi

2022-09-07

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2022
JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the attachment warrant as contained in memo no. 28 dated 06.04.2021 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) issued under the signature of the respondent no. 3 – the Certificate Officer (Mines), Mining Circle, Dumka against movable property of the certificate debtor (the petitioner herein), whereby in execution of decree for money, the certificate amount to the extent of Rs. 15,20,65,080/- is being sought to be recovered from the petitioner in connection with Certificate Case No. 02/2011-12 without considering the fact that the petitioner has preferred an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 11/2020-21 under Section 60 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 before the respondent no. 2 – the Deputy Commissioner, Godda after depositing 40% of the certificate amount being Rs. 3,36,67,492/- through e-challan on 19.01.2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred Misc. Appeal No. 11/2020-21 against the orders dated 20.12.2013 and 02.06.2017 passed by the respondent no. 3 in Certificate Case No. 02/2011-12 and has also made pre-deposit of 40% of the certificate amount i.e., Rs. 3,36,67,492/- through e-challan on 19.01.2019. However, during the pendency of the said appeal, the respondent no. 3 has issued the attachment warrant as contained in memo no. 28 dated 06.04.2021 for realisation of the certificate amount with interest against the General Manager, Rajmahal Project, Eastern Coalfields Limited. It is further submitted that though pursuant to issuance of the said attachment warrant, the petitioner has filed an application before the respondent no. 2 in the said Misc. Appeal No. 11/2020-21 for staying the process of attachment warrant issued by the respondent no. 3, yet no order has been passed by the said respondent, which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the limited prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, the respondent no. 2 is directed to take up the petitioners’ application filed in Misc. Appeal No. 11/2020-21 seeking stay of execution of process of attachment warrant as contained in memo no. 28 dated 06.04.2021 and pass an appropriate order on the same within two weeks from today. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction. 5. Till the said decision is taken by the respondent no. Appeal No. 11/2020-21 seeking stay of execution of process of attachment warrant as contained in memo no. 28 dated 06.04.2021 and pass an appropriate order on the same within two weeks from today. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction. 5. Till the said decision is taken by the respondent no. 2, the process of impugned attachment warrant shall be kept in abeyance.