IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1701 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.34546/2010 Dated 20/08/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ LEELA, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O. CHANDRAMOHAN, DHARMAKUDI, VADAKKEVILA P.O., MANAKKAD, KOLLAM-10. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. TODDY WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. 2. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, TODDY WORKERS' WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR OFFICE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 001. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR (R.R.), KOLLAM, PIN - 691 001. 5. BHADRAKUMAR, PARANKIMAMVILA VEEDU, EZHUKONE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAMPIN - 691 016. 6. SUNIL KUMAR, KANNIRAMVILA VEEDU, EZHUKONE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 016. MR.ANIL ANTO, STANDING COUNSEL FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.NO.1701/2011 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-A SERIES : COPY OF RECEIPTS. ANNEXURE-(A1) : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 30/03/1999. ANNEXURE-(A2) : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 16/06/1997. ANNEXURE-(A3) : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 24/01/2003. ANNEXURE-(A4) : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 08/12/2009. ANNEXURE-A2 : COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29/09/11 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.A. No.1701 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 18th day of November, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declaring that liability for toddy workers welfare fund contribution is joint and several for all the joint licencees. The position is same so far as the abkari dues also are concerned. The appellant's case is that she has paid substantial amount and in spite of the same, the respondents are proceeding only against her property and not against the properties of the joint licencees. 2. Learned Standing Counsel Shri.Renil Anto appearing for the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board supported the judgment by contending that legal position cannot be challenged. 3. After hearing both sides, what we feel is that even though there is no scope for interfering with the legal position declared by the learned Single judge, there is nothing wrong in W.A.No.1701/2011 2 Revenue authorities showing a kind of fairness and equitable consideration to the appellant by proceeding for recovery against others, if they have properties and assets, and certainly the appellant will have to furnish to the Revenue authorities the details of properties and assets of other defaulters (joint licencees) for the recovery authorities to proceed against the joint licencees' properties as well. We, accordingly, dispose of the Writ Appeal by modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge and by directing recovery against all defaulters (joint licencees), whose particulars of properties, if not available with the Revenue Authorities, will be furnished by the appellant immediately, so that recovery will be simultaneously initiated against the properties of all the defaulters. This Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jg