CHAUDHARY SIA SARAN SINHA, J.

1. In this writ application the petitioner Nirod Baran Banerjee has prayed for the quashing of Annexures 2 to 5 to this application in the following circumstances. A certificate proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for recovery of royalty amounting to Rs. 1,36,135.32. The main contention of Shri Sreenath Singh, in spite of several pleas being taken in the application, is that for non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the initiation of the certificate proceeding in Certificate Case No. 15 of 1976-77 against the petitioner is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction and as such the decisions to the contrary, as evidenced by Annexures-2 to 5 is unsupportable and liable to be quashed in this writ application. This contention was refuted by Shri Chunni Lal, learned counsel for the State.

2. Public Demand as defined in Sec. 3(6) of the Act refers to Sch.I to the Act. It contains several items. It is undisputed that Item No. 3 of the said schedule covers the instant case. Item No. 3 states as follows :-

"Any money which is declared by any law for