IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2009 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 29359 of 2007(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- K.V.KAVIRAJAN, S/O.VASUDEVAN, PORUNNAYIL VEEDU, MEENATHUCHERRY, SAKTHIKULANGARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, KOLLAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R) TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. SRI.EDMOND, S/O.JOSEPH, JOSEPH COTTAGE (VAKKEELAZHIKOM PURAYIDOM), KACHERI WARD, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.HARILAL, SC. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.N. SUDHA DEVI R3 BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 29359/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 19.04.99. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.D2-802/2005. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER NO.B1/EQ.626/1999 -2001 DATED 01.01.2002 FOR THE YEAR 1999 TO 2001. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 29359 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner was the registered owner of a stage carriage bus bearing Reg. No.KL-10 3024. According to the petitioner, the petitioner sold the above vehicle to the 3rd respondent with effect from 19.04.99 and the ownership was transferred in favour of the 3rd respondent. Petitioner submits that on account of heavy loss in his business he lost his mental equilibrium and he was under prolonged treatment. When he recovered from his illness respondents 1 and 2 initiated Revenue Recovery proceedings for recovery of Motor workers Welfare Fund contributions for the period from 1999-2000 to 2002-03 during which period the petitioner was not the owner of the motor transport undertaking. On enquiry, the petitioner came to know that Ext.P3 final determination order is the basis of the proceedings. Although petitioner obtained copy of Ext.P3 order from the 1st respondent. By that time the period prescribed for filing appeal had already expired. According to the petitioner, he is not the owner of the motor transport undertaking after 19.04.99 and for WPC : 29359/07 -:2:- periods subsequent to 19.04.99, he is not liable to pay contributions under the Kerala Motor Transport Welfare Fund Act. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i. to call for the records leading to the Assessment and Revenue Recovery Proceedings for the year 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 from the respondents 1 &2 and issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction quashing the entire demand and its Revenue Recovery Proceedings for the year 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 against the petitioner. ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 & 2 not to initiate any Recovery Proceedings including Revenue Recovery against the petitioner pursuant to demand for the period from 1999-2000, 2000- 01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 towards motor workers welfare fund in respect of a stage carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-10-3024 covered as per Exhibit.P1. iii. to declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay any demand in respect of Motor Workers Welfare Fund for the period 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 in respect of the stage carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-10-3024 covered as per Exhibit.P1. iv. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to reconsider the demand for the period 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 in the light of Exhibit.P1 within in a stipulated time as directed by this Hon'ble Court granting leave to the petitioner to file pleadings WPC : 29359/07 -:3:- before the authorities.” 2. Counsel for the 1st respondent would submit that although notice was issued to the petitioner for assessment of the contributions, he did not turn up or file any objections and therefore Ext.P3 final determination order has been passed pursuant to which only the Revenue Recovery Proceedings have been initiated. 3. Although in view of the alternate remedy by way of appeal available to the petitioner, I should not ordinarily entertain the writ petition in view of the uncontroverted statement in the writ petition regarding the mental ailment of the petitioner which incapacitated him from availing of that remedy, I am inclined to entertain this writ petition. 4. The petitioner has produced Ext.P1 which is stated to be the copy of the sale agreement between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Although 3rd respondent has entered appearance, he has not chosen to file any counter affidavit controverting the averments in the writ petition. That being so, I must assume that the averments made by the petitioner against the 3rd respondent are correct. In such circumstances, I am of opinion that, it is only just WPC : 29359/07 -:4:- and proper that the 1st respondent reconsiders the matter after hearing the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent. For this purpose I quash Exts.P2 and P3. The 1st respondent shall reconsider the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent and pass fresh final determination order as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb