IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 33462 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.T.RANJITH, S/O.K.T.PURUSHOTTAMAN KOYILOTH THEKKEYIL HOUSE AIR ROAD, PUTHIYANGADI, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS SRI.SRINATH GIRISH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MOTOR TRANSPORTO WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD KOZHIKODE. 2. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, (APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND) CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. BY GP SMT.N.SUDHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).33462/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 13th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner was assessed to contribution under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act as per Ext.P1 order. Petitioner paid the contribution and then sought for a review of the order as per Ext.P3. Application for review was rejected under Ext.P4 order passed by the District Executive Officer. Petitioner preferred Ext.P5 statutory appeal against Ext.P4 and according to the petitioner, a copy of Ext.P4 order was also enclosed along with Ext.P5. By Ext.P6 a communication was received from the District Labour Officer, the appellate authority, asking for a copy of Ext.P4 order passed by the District Executive Officer. By Ext.P7 order dated 18.7.2008, Ext.P5 appeal has been rejected on the ground that a copy of the order had not been supplied. Same is now under challenge in the writ petition. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. W.P.(C).33462/2008 2 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I think it is appropriate that the appeal is disposed of on merits. This is essentially since the contribution claimed by the original authority has been paid by the petitioner. Appeal is entitled to be dispose of on merits. 4. In the result, Ext.P7 is set aside and the second respondent shall consider Ext.P5 appeal on merits. Petitioner shall produce a copy of Ext.P4 order and shall retain proof of such production. It will be appropriate that the petitioner keeps an acknowledgment of the production of the copy of the order. Fresh orders on the appeal shall be passed by the second respondent, within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with Ext.P4 order before the second respondent by the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs