1. In this petition, it is brought to the notice of the Court that recovery certificate was issued in 2001.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner has claimed and alleged that any action for attaching the property in question, i.e. property mentioned/described in the recovery certificate was not taken by the concerned and responsible officer for long time.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has further claimed and alleged that such inaction on the part of the concerned and responsible officer resulted into disposal/sale of property by the borrower in 2007.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that delay and inaction in the interregnum, i.e. from 2001 to 2007 has caused immense hardship and loss to the petitioner corporation inasmuch as the property in question has been sold of by the borrower on account of inaction on the part of the responsible and concerned officer.
5. During the proceedings of present petition, officers of respondents have tried to play blame-game inasmuch as the responsibility and inaction are tried to be shifted from one person to another and from one authority to another.
6. At the end, office of Collector has, disregarding the fact that office of Collector is the Head of Administration of the District, informed the Court that it was the office of Taluka Development Officer who had to take necessary action for executing the recovery certificate.
7. The blame-game by the responsible officers does not lead the matter to any fruitful result or any conclusion as regards the responsibility of the officer for the inaction in executing the recovery certificate which has not been executed for almost 11 years and the petitioner corporation, which is a body corporate created by the Central Government, Ministry of MSME (Medium, Small, Micro Enterprises), has suffered loss because recovery certificate has not been executed for almost 11 years.
8. Therefore, yesterday, learned AGP was asked to get instructions as to what actions are proposed to be taken by the Secretary, Revenue Department.
9. In response to the said instructions, learned AGP has placed on record communication dated 5.11.2012 stating, inter-alia, that Deputy Secretary has called for report on the basis of which the further action against the erring officers will be considered and taken.
10. Since 15 days time is granted by the Deputy Secretary for submission of the report, hearing of present proceedings is adjourned to 30.11.2012.
11. On the said date, Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, has addressed letter dated 5.11.2012 to the Collector, Rajkot shall file an affidavit and state the details about the report received in his office and the actions which are proposed to be taken against the erring officers.
12. In the meanwhile, respondents No.1, 2 and 3 including the Collector being the head of the administration of the district, are directed to initiate action and take steps for executing recovery certificate without any delay and ensure that certificate is executed against the property of respondent No.4, i.e. the borrower.
S.O.
to 30.11.2012.
(K.M.
Thaker, J.) Bharat*