ORDER :

1. The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 31.12.2019 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 2, the Certificate Officer-cum-Deputy Director, Mines, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka in Certificate Case No. 08/2018-19, whereby “warrant of attachment” has been issued against the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the said respondent to consider the objection dated 18.03.2020 filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act 1914”) and to adjudicate and amend the certificate accordingly.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a piece of land situated at Plot No. 2513/P of village-Dhobna, measuring an area of 2.75 acres was leased to the petitioner vide deed dated 30.08.2011 for the purpose of mining of stones for a period of 10 years and an amount of Rs. 24,750/- was paid as security deposit for the said mining leasehold area. However, the environmental clearance and other statutory permissions were not granted for the said mining operation and as such, the mining activity on the said land could not commence. The said fact was duly intimated to the respondent no. 3, the District Mining Officer, Jamtara, who vide memo no. 824/M dated 23.09.2014 acknowledged the said fact. The petitioner time and again intimated the respondent no. 3 regarding the closure of the leased mines making prayer for termination of the lease deed, however, the respondent no. 3 did not pass the order of termination of the mining lease. Thereafter, the respondent no. 3 filed Certificate Case No. 8 of 2018-19 before the respondent no. 2 for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,85,805/- from the petitioner. The petitioner had no knowledge about the institution of the said certificate case, as he had not been served any statutory notice under Section 7 of the Act, 1914 which prevented him to file any objection to the certificate amount. It is submitted that the certificate proceeding was conducted in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the procedure established by law. The respondent no. 2 proceeded without recording any satisfaction in relation to service of notice and vide order dated 03.06.2019 issued “warrant of attachment” against the petitioner. Thereafter, on expiry of the time for execution of the said “warrant of attachment”, the same was again issued vide order dated 31.12.2019. As soon as the petitioner got information about initiation of the certificate proceeding, he filed an objection dated 18.03.2020 under Section 9 of the Act, 1914 denying the certificate amount. He also filed an application dated 18.03.2020 for review and recall of the order of the “warrant of attachment”. However, the respondent no. 3 rejected the objection of the petitioner on the same day by holding that the same has been filed after the expiry of prescribed period and that the same was not in accordance with law.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was served with a notice vide letter no. 85/M, Jamtara dated 19.01.2018 for violation of the terms and conditions of the lease deed, however he did not comply the said notice and as such, vide order dated 03.05.2018 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara, the mining lease of the petitioner was terminated and vide letter no. 575/M dated 05.05.2018, he was informed accordingly. It is further submitted that vide letter no. 746/M, Jamtara dated 12.07.2018, the petitioner was informed that a sum of Rs. 4,61,522/- was due against him in connection with fixed rent, surface rent, interest and royalty for mining lease area till June, 2018, but he did not respond to it. Again vide letter no. 1101/M Jamtara dated 19.11.2018, the respondent no. 3 sent a reminder to the petitioner, however, he neither replied the same nor paid the du