( 2026:JHHC:25603 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No. 6573 of 2026 Gulam Mustafa, aged about 41 years, son of late Mukhtar, Ex- Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Chhatarbar, resident of village - Chhatarbar, PO - Chhatarbar, PS & District - Koderma, Jharkhand.… … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. - Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma. 3. The District Certificate Officer, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma. 4. The Executive Engineer, Drinking Water & Sanitation Division, Koderma, P.O. & P.S. - Koderma, District - Koderma. … … Respondents --- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Shahabuddin, SC -VII : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC-VII --- 04/25th August, 2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Considering the nature of the order which I intend to pass, since it is the case of writ of certiorari, it is not necessary to direct the respondents to file counter affidavit as the impugned order speaks for itself. 3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.02.2026 whereby the District Certificate Officer - cum - District Supply Officer, Koderma has rejected the objection of the petitioner filed under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act and directed the petitioner to pay the amount within a period of 90 days. ( 2026:JHHC:25603 ) 2 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned order. 5. The impugned order takes note of an application wherein an undertaking was given by the petitioner and it has been mentioned that he will pay the rest of the amount and had paid Rs. 7,00,000/- initially. The said application of the petitioner has been brought before this Court at Page No. 63 of this brief. 6. After going through the said application, I find that the petitioner had deposited Rs. 7,00,000/- that too under protest as the Certificate Case is still pending and thereafter the order has been passed. 7. Thus, the finding of the Certificate Officer that the petitioner has undertaken to clear the balance amount, is incorrect. 8. Further, from the impugned order, I find that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, denying his liability and the impugned order also suggests that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 9 of the Public Demands Recovery Act but none of the grounds taken by the petitioner, denying his liability, has been dealt with in the impugned order. In a most mechanical manner, without applying the mind, the Certificate Officer, has dismissed his petition filed under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act and confirmed the certificate. 9. Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, is a self contained Code. Once a requisition is filed and process is initiated to recover the amount, in terms of Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, a certificate debtor, gets opportunity to deny his liability. 10. Once the liability is denied by invoking Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, in terms of Section 10, the Certificate Officer is duty bound to determine such petition, if necessary by taking evidence also. ( 2026:JHHC:25603 ) 3 11. The Certificate Officer has to decide as to whether the certificate debtor is liable to pay the entire money. He has the power to set aside, modify & vary certificates accordingly. 12. While doing so, the Certificate Officer, has to apply his mind independently and deal with the objections. 13. In this case, I find that none of the objections taken by the petitioner in this application under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, was dealt with. The order is cryptic without application of mind, thus, is liable to be set aside. 14. Accordingly, order dated 20.02.2026 passed in Certificate Case No. 02 of 2022-23 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Certificate Officer to decide the application of the petitioner filed under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act by a reasoned order dealing with the objections raised by the petitioner after hearing the petitioner/his counsel. 15. The entire process should be concluded within a period of twelve weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. 16. It is made clear that within ten days from today, the petitioner will appear before Certificate Officer along with a copy of this order and the next date of hearing will be informed to the petitioner by the officer. 17. If the petitioner does not appear or co-operate on the date fixed, the Certificate Officer may proceed ex-parte. 18. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Aditi Dated: 25.08.2026