IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2009 / 12TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 21797 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- V.SUBRA4MANION, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, KRISHNA BHAVAN, ASRAMOM P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR. T.A.SHAJI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOLLAM, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, KOLLAM. R1 AND R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.K. BABU R3 BY ADV. MR. P. RAMAKRISHNAN, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH WP (c) no. 21798 of 2009 ON 03/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 21797 of 2009 and 21798 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 3rd day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The issue involved in both these cases is whether the respondents are justified in assessing and demanding contribution under the Kerala Motor Workers’ Welfare Fund Act, in respect of the vehicles belonging to the petitioners, which are being used for imparting training in driving in the concerned Driving School owned by the petitioners. 2. The learned standing counsel for the 3rd respondent submits, with reference to the entry made in the Certificate of Registration showing the class of the vehicle as ‘private service vehicle’ that, since no endorsement is made thereon stating that, it is for imparting training in the Driving School, it is equally possible that the vehicle could be used as a 'private service vehicle', under which circumstance, there is a liability to effect the contribution as contemplated under the relevant provisions of the Motor Transport Workers’ Welfare Fund Act. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in both the cases, with specific reference to the 'Permit' issued by the very same authority who issued the Certificate of Registration submits that, the purpose for WP (C) No. 21797 & 21798 of 2009 : 2 : which the Permit is given has been specifically shown against column No. 7, where it has been stated in crystal-clear terms that, it is for imparting Driving Instructions to Trainees and hence that the alleged apprehension is quite wrong and misconceived. Copies of the relevant Certificates of Registration and the Permits concerned have already been produced before this Court. 4. The crucial question as to whether such vehicles being used in the Driving Schools would attract the liability under the Motor Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985 had come up for consideration before this Court and the position has been answered by the Division Bench of this Court against the respondents, vide the decision in Rajesh Vs. Joint RTO [2009 (2) KLT 615]. In the said circumstances, the issue no longer remains germane and the petitioners are entitled to succeed. 5. In the above circumstances, it is declared that the vehicles concerned in both the cases will not attract any liability under the Kerala Motor Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1985, in so far as the said vehicles are being used for imparting training to students in the Driving School. 6. There is a further case for the petitioner in WP(C) 21798 of 2009 that, in respect of the two vehicles bearing Nos. KL 2 D 5724 and KL 4 D 4440, the Permits have not been renewed, insisting for payment of contribution to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund. Since non-removal of the Permit is only because of the said WP (C) No. 21797 & 21798 of 2009 : 3 : circumstance and since the above issue has already been decided in favour of the petitioner, there will be direction to the first respondent to renew the Permit, if the application in this regard is otherwise in order. This shall be finalized and necessary orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Both the Writ Petitions are allowed as above. No cost. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd