IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2007 / 19TH SRAVANA 1929 WP(C).No. 9846 of 2004(V) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.BHASKARAN, S/O.NARAYANAN KUTTY MENON, PULLATTU HOUSE, WARRIAM LANE, POONKUNNAM, TRICHUR, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, V.REGHU, S/O. P.MADHAVAN NAIR, VADAKKEDATH HOUSE, PUTHUSSERY,CHERUTHURUTHY VILLAGE,THALAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.DANIEL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION (R) DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, PALAKKAD. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE, TRICHUR. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), TRICHUR. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELADEVI, SC,KMTWF BOARD, GOVT. PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHADEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.9846/2004: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE INTIMATION LETTER ISSUED TO THE R.2. DTD. 30/09/91. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD. 27/11/93. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 23/06/98 FROM THE R.4. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 24/06/98 FROM THE R.4. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R.4. DTD. 04/02/2004. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. KURIAN JOSEPH , J ========================== W.P.(C) NO. 9846 OF 2004 ========================== Dated this the 10th day of August, 2007. JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings for recovery of contribution due to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund for the period 1989-1990 and March 91 to August 91. It is seen that the petitioner had approached this Court earlier leading to judgment in W.P.(C) No. 34953/2003 wherein this Court directed the petitioner to produce the relevant materials before the Executive Officer. It is stated in the counter affidavit that no steps were taken by the petitioner and yet in the counter affidavit it is stated that " If the petitioner produces any receipt showing the payment, the 2nd respondent will accept the same". Therefore, in case the petitioner has still any grievance left regarding the nonacceptance of the receipts, it is for the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent. Without prejudice to such liberty, the writ petition is dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. rv