IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 6165 of 2005(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.HARIS, S/O. MUHAMMED, AGED 35 YEARS, PADATHIL HOUSE, MODAKKALLUR P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. K.T.ISMAYIL, S/O. ABOOBACKER, KORATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, EKAROOL P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE ADDL.DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, VADAKARA. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ATHOLI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC,KMTWF BOARD FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 6165/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE REGISTRTION PARTICULARS IN RESPECT OF THE STAGE CARRIAGE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KEZ 2340. P2 : COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER. P3 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY R3 TO PETITIONER. P4 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 18/10/2004 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO R2. P5 : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 25/11/2004. P6 SERIES : COPIES OF DEMAND NOTICES DATED 20/01/2005 ISSUED BY R3 TO PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 6165 of 2005 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings, namely Exts.P6 & P6(2), for recovery of arrears of motor transport workers welfare fund contribution dues. According to petitioner, since he was abroad he had nothing to do with the liability sought to be recovered. Even though counter affidavit is not filed, learned standing counsel appearing for the welfare fund board, after verifying records, informed the Court that assessment until 1997-98 was not contested by the petitioner and for the last two years i.e.1998-2000, though petitioner was served provisional determination order, petitioner did not raise any objection. Therefore final determination order was issued and the same was served on petitioner on 11/05/2001. Similarly, provisional determination order for the year 2000-2001 was served on petitioner on 12/10/2001 and petitioner did not choose to file any objection. Therefore, final determination order was issued for Rs.24,276/-. Even though this order was also served on petitioner, the same was returned unserved. Learned standing counsel submitted that there is mistake in Exts.P6 & P6(2) in as much as WP(C) No.6165/2005 -2- the year of liability is shown as 2000-01, even though the liability due under Ext.P6(2) is for the years 1998 to 2000. I do not think there is any bonafides in petitioner's contention that he is abroad and he has nothing to do with the liability. Petitioner has not even contested the assessments and final determination orders after 2000-2001. It is not known whether petitioner has cleared the arrears until 1997-98. Petitioner has not come out with full facts is evident from the fact that he is not mentioning about the stage carriage operation before his leaving India. Petitioner has not stated any reason why he has not challenged the assessment and final determination orders in appeal. If petitioner has any grievance against the final determination orders, it is for the petitioner to file appeal, after collecting orders from the respondents. If petitioner approaches the Executive Officer, he will serve copy of the order to petitioner. Since primafacie, liability is established, there will be direction to respondents to withhold recovery proceedings for recovery of 50% of the liability and interest thereof for three months from now on petitioner remitting balance 50% liability, after adjusting payments already made, and file appeal against the assessment and determination orders, within six weeks from now. WP(C) No.6165/2005 -3- If 50% is paid and appeal is filed within six weeks from now, there will be direction to the appellate authority to treat the appeal as one filed in time and dispose of the same within two months thereafter. Recovery after three months will be based on orders in appeal. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg