Abu Noman vs The State of Bihar and Others

Navaniti Pd. Singh, J.—The petitioner''s grievance in the present case is that he had entered into an agreement with the Electricity Board for supply of electricity in the capacity of Managing Director of M/s Sasaram Cold Storage Private Limited, a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. For dues of the said Company as a consumer the petitioner cannot be personally proceeded against, Though the petitioner has not filed agreement which has been executed with the respondent- Board, the respondent-Board has filed the same as annexure ''B'' to their counter affidavit. A reference to the same clearly shows that agreement is entered into between the parties under the Indian Companies Act bearing registration no. 1751 of 1982-83 with registered office at Sasaram acting through its Managing Director, namely, the petitioner. The agreement is signed not by the petitioner in his personal capacity but as a Managing Director of the Company aforesaid as would be apparent from the agreement itself. Every place where the petitioner has signed the agreement it is with rubber stamp of Managing Director of the said Company. It is, thus, clear that there is no private, personal or an individual agreement of the petitioner with the Board. The consumer, thus, is the company and not the petitioner. The Board in its counter affidavit has filed requisition for certificate as required to be filed under the Bihar Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914. The said requisition is not against the Company at all. It is solely against the petitioner individually. Apparently, acting on the said requisition certificate is issued by the Certificate Officer and that too in personal name of the petitioner and a notice u/s 7 of the Act is also issued by the certificate court not against the Company nor even against the petitioner as the Managing Director of the Company but against the petitioner in his personal capacity. In my view, in view of the facts as noted above this case is squarely covered on all fours by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Vs. The State of Bihar and Others . The certificate proceedings against the petitioner as instituted by the respondent-Board are wholly without jurisdiction and are liable to be quashed and are quashed as such. The writ petition is, thus, allowed.