IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 8TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30181 of 2005(R) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ----------------------- 1. T.C. ASOKAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. CHENNAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, P.O. ASTHAMICHIRA, THRISSUR. 2. SRI. K.A. MANOJ, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. AYYAPPANKUTTY, KOODAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALATHUR, ANANDAPURAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRTARY. 2. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, THRISSUR. 4. VARGHESE PARAMBI, PARAMBI HOUSE, CHANTHAKUNNU, IRINJALAKUDA P.O. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LABOUR & REHABILITATION (S) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SREELATHA FOR R3 & R5 ADV. SRI.K.HARILAL, SC, KTWWFB FOR R1 & R2 ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN FOR R4 SMT.PREETHI KESAVAN FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.30181/2005 R APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO.A-2/IRINJALAKUDA 109-222/10/93-3/97/279 DTD. 12/05/1998. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO.IR(2)4796/03 DTD. 27/02/2004. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE DTD. 02/02/2003. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE DT. 06/06/2003. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 21/01/2004. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.G.O.(RT) NO.1307/05/LBR DTD. 20/05/2005. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 19/01/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30181 of 2005 ------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners are toddy workers registered under the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act. By Ext.P1 order, the Welfare Fund Inspector assessed the contribution payable by the petitioners' employer. But, it seems that the then employer of the petitioners in the year 1997-98 had failed to pay the contribution as per the salary given to the petitioners earlier. The petitioners made a complaint in this regard before the authorities. Ultimately, the shops were auctioned by the Irinjalakuda Toddy Workers' Co-operative Society. The petitioners approached this court in O.P.No.6064/02 for a direction to the District Labour Officer, to initiate conciliation proceedings. A direction was so issued and in the meanwhile, the 4th respondent became the employer of the W.P.(C).NO.30181/05 :: 2 :: petitioners from the year 2003-04. The 4th respondent effected contributions on the basis of the salary drawn by the petitioners and this was reported and the conciliation proceedings were closed. But later, the petitioners, according to them, realised that though their shares were deducted according to the salary being paid to the petitioners, the amount was not fully remitted by the 4th respondent. This deficit was brought to the notice of the 2nd respondent Welfare Fund Inspector with a request that the contribution be assessed on the basis of the actual wages drawn by the petitioners. There was alleged inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent. The petitioners approached this court with O.P.No.33852/03 requiring the Welfare Fund Inspector to pass orders, after considering the petitioners' request in that regard. It seems that without considering any one of the aspects raised by the petitioners, the Welfare Fund Inspector proceeded to pass Ext.P5 order W.P.(C).NO.30181/05 :: 3 :: which was affirmed under Ext.P6. Exts.P5 and P6 are challenged in this writ petition. 2. There is no counter affidavit by the 4th respondent. 3. The assertion made by the petitioners that the contribution paid by the employer was not commensurate with the wages of the petitioners does not seem to be controverted. In fact, wage slips were produced by the petitioners and the employer does not controvert those slips. There is irregular exercise of jurisdiction by the first authority, as also by the appellate authority, vitiating Exts.P6 and P6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed in part. Exts.P5 and P6 are quashed. The 2nd respondent shall pass fresh orders on the total contribution to be paid by the 4th respondent for the year 2002-03 on the basis of the wages actually drawn by the petitioners, after issuing notice to the 4th respondent and W.P.(C).NO.30181/05 :: 4 :: the petitioners and after hearing them. Fresh orders shall be passed within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//