IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2010 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37191 of 2010(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- DEVON FOODS LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, DEVON FOODS LTD., 262/XV, MARIATHURUTH.P.O, CHUNGAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, OFFICE THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 001. 2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 3. ASSITANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, CHALAKUZHY BUILDING, C.M.S. COLLEGE ROAD, P.B. NO.38, KOTTAYAM-686 001. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN, R2 BY ADV. SRI. K.S. MANU, R3 BY ADV. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 37191 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Private Limited Company engaged in manufacture and sale of food articles. Petitioner Company owns different vehicles which is being used for their business purposes. Issue involved in this writ petition pertains to payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund. According to the petitioner, their establishment is covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 (EPF Act) and they are regularly paying contributions to the Employees Provident Fund Scheme (EPF Scheme) with respect to the workers engaged in their company and in the vehicles. Exts.P1 and P2 documents were produced in support of the said claim. Being an establishment covered under the provisions of the EPF Act, the petitioner claimed that they are exempted from the provisions of the Kerala Motor Workers Welfare Fund and the Scheme framed thereunder and as such from payment of contributions to the WP(C) .37191/2010 2 fund constituted thereunder. Grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of the above situation the 2nd respondent is not issuing clearance certificate facilitating payment of motor vehicle tax which is to be produced before the 1st respondent. 2. The legal question involved in this writ petition stands covered by a decision of this court in Hymavathi vs. Special Deputy Tahsildar (2008 (3) KLT 807). It is evident that establishment of the petitioner is covered under the provisions of the EPF Act. As such the petitioner is not liable for payment of contributions to the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund. In such circumstances I am of the opinion that there is no justification in denying acceptance of motor vehicle tax with respect to the vehicles owned by the petitioner. 3. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to receive motor vehicle tax with respect to the vehicles owned by the petitioner, without insisting for production of proof regarding payment of contribution to the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund, subject to condition of the petitioner producing proof regarding payment of contributions WP(C) .37191/2010 3 to the Employees Provident Fund and also subject to production of proof regarding ownership of the vehicles in question. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/