IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 688 of 2008(F) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ A.P.NAJEEB ,"ABRAB" P.O. KURICHIYIL THALASSERY-2. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD KANNUR. 2. THE TAHSILDAR,REVENUE RECOVERY THALASSERY. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KODIYERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON C.VARGHESE,SC,KMTWF BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============================= W.P.(C)NO. 688 OF 2008 ============================== DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2008 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P1 to P4 revenue recovery notices. There is a further prayer to direct the first respondent to serve notice of assessment for the respective years and to complete the proceedings after considering the objections of the petitioner. 2. The pleadings in this writ petition show that the complaint of the petitioner is that without complying with the statutory formalities, revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner and that notices were not proceeded by demand or assessment. 3. A statement has been filed by the first respondent in which it is conended that the writ petition is only to be dismissed as the petitioner has suppressed material facts . It is stated that Exts.P1 to P4 are for realizing the welfare fund dues for the years W.P.C. 688/2008 -2- 2003-04 and 2004-05. For the year 2003-04, provisional determination order was passed on 17-11-2004 and after enquiry, final determination order was passed on 31-1-2006 which was accepted by the petitioner on 29-5-2006. In so far as the period 2004-05 is concerned, provisional determination order was passed on 26-5-2006. Subsequently, the enquiry was conducted and final determination order was passed on 19-6- 2006 which was also accepted by the petitioner on 5-7-2006. It is suppressing all these facts and pleading ignorance, this writ petition has been filed. 4. It is also seen that for previous periods commencing from 1999-2000 onwards, the assessment was completed and in fact, that was challenged by the petitioner in appeal and on its dismissal, W.P.(C)No.1011/2005 was also filed before this Court which was also unsuccessful. The writ petition not only lacks merit but also for the grave suppression of fact, if deserves to be dismissed and I do so. ks. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE