Certificate proceedings initiated against a deceased person are void ab initio and liable to be quashed.

The petitioner, Munni Devi, wife of late Vanshi Paswan, challenged Certificate Case No. 42 of 2018–19 initiated under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914, for recovery of ₹11,15,621 with interest.

The proceeding, including the application for certificate under Section 5, the certificate in Form 1 under Sections 4 and 6, and the notice under Section 7, was issued against Vanshi Paswan, who had died on 12 August 2003—approximately fifteen years before initiation of the certificate proceeding.

The respondents contended that the petitioner had not informed the Corporation about her husband’s death and stated that they intended to amend the certificate proceeding and proceed against her.

Whether a certificate proceeding initiated and notice issued against a person who was already dead are legally valid.

Whether the respondents could continue or amend the impugned proceeding to recover the alleged dues from the petitioner.

The Court applied the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914, particularly Sections 4 and 6 concerning the public demand certificate, Section 5 concerning the application for certificate, and Section 7 concerning the notice to the certificate-debtor.

The Court held that initiation of a certificate proceeding and issuance of notice against a person who was already deceased is void ab initio, since proceedings cannot validly be instituted against a dead person.

The material on record established that Vanshi Paswan died on 12 August 2003, whereas Certificate Case No. 42 of 2018–19 was initiated against him in 2018.

Consequently, the application for certificate, the certificate, and the notice under the Public Demand Recovery Act were directed against a non-existent legal person.

The respondents’ explanation that the petitioner had failed to report the death did not cure the fundamental defect in initiating the proceeding against the deceased.

The Court therefore treated the initiation itself as void ab initio and set aside the entire certificate proceeding, including the notice and other orders passed therein.

The entire certificate proceeding, including the application for certificate, the certificate, the notice dated 13 September 2018, and all consequential orders, was set aside.

The respondents were granted liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law if they still intended to recover the alleged amount.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of, along with any pending interlocutory applications.