D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) BY this common order, both these writ applications are disposed of since issues involved are identical.
(2.) CHALLENGE in both these writ applications is to the orders dated 1.2.2008 6.2.2008 passed by the Certificate Officer, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur (Respondent No. 2) in C.C. No. 120(BL) of 2007 -2008 and C.C. No. 123 (BL) of 2007 -08 respectively, whereby the objection of the petitioners against continuation of the certificate proceeding for recovery of the debt due to the respondent Bank before the Certificate Officer, was rejected, The petitioners in both these writ applications, who are referred to as "debtors" had obtained loan from the respondent Bank. The principal amount of debt payable by the petitioners was above Rs. 11 lakhs excluding interest. Consequent upon failure of the petitioners to repay the debt amount, the respondent Bank filed two separate cases before the Certificate Officer, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act against the petitioners individually for realisation of the debt amounts. Certificate proceedings vide C.C. No. 120 (BL) of 2007 -08 against the petitioner of WP(C) No. 1070 of 2008 and C.C. No. 123 (BL) of 2007 -08 against the petitioner of WP(C) No. 1074 of 2008 were initiated. Notice under Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act was issued and served upon the petitioners in each of the certificate proceedings. The petitioners appeared in the proceedings and filed their respective objections under Section 9 of the Act, praying for dismissal of the certificate proceedings primarily on the ground that the Certificate Officer lacks jurisdiction to entertain the claim of the bank and to proceed for recovery of the debt amount, since such jurisdiction was barred under the provisions of Recovery of Debt Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
(3.) BY the impugned orders, the Certificate Officer summarily rejected the objections and directed the petitioners to pay off the claim amount, within the dates stipulated in the impugned orders, else coercive measure for recovery would follow. Aggrieved by the impugned orders, the petitioners have filed the instant writ applications.;