IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1075 of 2008(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ S.KUMARESAN, S/O. C.SUBRAMANIA PILLAI, RESIDING AT 3/164, RAILWAY COLONY, KALLEKULANGARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LABOUR & REHABILITATION (S) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, KOLLAM-1. 3. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, PALAKKAD. 4. C.KRISHNAN, KANNANKUDAM HOUSE, THIRUVALATHUR P.O., KODUMBA, PALAKKAD. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI I.V.PRAMOD R2 & 3 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI P.RAMAKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 1075 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: January 9, 2008 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P12. Ext.P12 is the final determination order passed by the 3rd respondent concerning the period 1988 to 2003, treating the 4th respondent as the driver of the motor transport undertaking of the petitioner. 2. Though various contentions have been raised by the petitioner including that by Ext.P2 this issue had become final, I am not persuaded to examine the correctness of the same. In fact, in Ext.P7 itself the petitioner has stated that the 4th respondent was his driver until 1998. If that be so, the factual dispute regarding employment or non-employment of the 4th respondent has to be appreciated and decided. Such factual adjudication cannot be undertaken in a writ petition, especially when the statute provides for a remedy of appeal that should be pursued by the petitioner. WP(C) 1075/2008 Page numbers Without prejudice to the contentions and the right of the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy, the writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-