Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - (1.) Reference may be made to the order dated 28.01.2019 whereby and whereunder this Court after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner as also the State respondent wherein it has been argued that on the basis of deemed service of notice the distress warrant has been issued by passing an order under Section 10 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914.
(2.) This Court after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner has adjourned the matter since the bank was not represented on that date, therefore, the petitioner was directed to serve copy of the writ petition upon the learned counsel for the State Bank of India, in turn thereof, copy of the same has been served upon him and the Bank has been represented by Mr. Rajesh Kumar.
(3.) Learned counsel for the Bank has fairly submitted by referring to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State respondent that on the basis of deemed service of notice, the certificate has been issued by taking decision under Section 10 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 without resorting to the alternative mode of service of notice i.e. by way of paper publication.;