- (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 20.02.2013 in Certificate Case No. 05 of 201213, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the objection under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 has been dismissed vide order dated 20.02.2013 without considering the plea taken by the petitioner and on the same day a direction has been issued by the Certificate Officer to the petitioner to deposit Rs. 56,38,150/ with interest. It is contended that the procedure prescribed under the 1914 Act has not been followed by the Certificate Officer in as much as, no proper opportunity was given to the petitioner nor the petitioner was permitted to lead evidence. There is no final determination of the certificate amount by the Certificate Officer and therefore, the petitioner can maintain the writ petition avoiding the statutory provision under Section 60 of the Act.
(3.) Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Whirlpool Corpn. vs. Registrar of Trade Marks", (1998) 8 SCC 1, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 20.02.2013 is liable to the setaside.;