IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11419 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ T.V.SAJEEV, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.VELUTTY (LATE), THARAYIL HOUSE, THANISSERY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, THRISSUR. 2. THE CHIEF WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), MUKUNDAPURAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY SC FOR KTWWFB- RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.11419 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner submits that he was the licensee for running toddy shops in group No.IV of Kodungallur Excise Range during the year 2007-2008. According to the petitioner, while remitting advance contribution payable under the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund, payment made by him was in excess by approximately 40%. In view of this, he made a request to adjust the excess payment made by him towards his later dues. In Ext.P4, the request so made by the petitioner was directed to be considered with notice. Despite the direction contained in Ext.P4 judgment of this court, his request has been rejected by Ext.P6 and Counsel for the petitioner complains that the order was passed without even issuing notice as directed by this court. 2. The reason stated in Ext.P6 for rejecting the request is that in terms of the provisions of the Act, the petitioner is bound to continue the payment of advance contribution. According to the first respondent, the adjustments sought for by the petitioner is possible when final determination order is passed. WPC 11419/08 2 3. From the facts, it is evident that the petitioner is not disputing his liability to pay his advance contribution. He only says that what he paid towards the advance contribution is much in excess what he should have paid. If that be so, I do not think that the provisions of the scheme will stand in the way in considering the request made by the petitioner for adjustments of the excess payment that he has made. Now at this stage what is required is that the respondent shall pass a final determination order. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the first respondent shall pass final determination order in relation to the toddy shops in group No.IV of Kodungallur Excise Range for the year 2007-2008 of which the petitioner was the licensee. Orders shall be passed with notice to the petitioner within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P7 will be kept in abeyance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE csl