IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10690 of 2008(V) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.T. MUHAMOOD RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. G.BALACHANDRAN, RETIRED LECTURER, SD COLLEGE,ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.V. MANOJKUMAR - R1 BY ADV. SRI.AZAD BABU - R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.3859 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.10690/2008 V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN VERSION. EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 17/08/04 IN OP(A) NO.221/03 OF THE CDRF, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 22/06/06 OF CDRF IN EP 10/05. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE UNDER SEC.34. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE UNDER SEC.7. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) 10690 & 3859 of 2008 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated: SEPTEMBER 1, 2008 JUDGMENT The Director and the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education have filed W.P.(C) 10690 of 2008 praying for quashing Exts.P3 and P4. Ext.P3 is an order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alappuzha in OP No.A.221/2003 filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C) 3859 of 2008. In that writ petition, what he seeks is a direction to pay the amount due under the order of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum referred to above. 2. Petitioner is a retired lecturer from SD College, Alappuzha. After his retirement, he approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum by filing Ext.P1 complaint praying for a direction to pay Rs.1,16,460.40, being the balance PF amount as on 30.9.2003 with interest, compensation and costs. Ext.P2 is the objection that was filed by the respondents before the Consumer Disputes W.P.(C) 10690 & 3859 of 2008 2 Redressal Forum, in which the dispute raised was regarding the amount claimed by the teacher. The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum overruled the objections and passed Ext.P3 order and directed payment of Rs.1,16,460/-. The amount was not paid. Therefore revenue recovery proceedings were initiated and Exts.P5 and P6 revenue recovery notices were issued. It is in this background the Director and the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education filed W.P.(C) 10690 of 2008 challenging Exts.P3, P5 and P6 and the teacher concerned has filed W.P.(C) 3859 of 2008 seeking expeditious recovery of the amount due. 3. The submission made by the learned Government Pleader is that in view of sec.2(1)(d) read with sec.2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, a teacher is not a consumer in as much as he has been rendering service under a contract of personal service. The learned Government Pleader has also relied on the Apex Court judgment in State of Orissa v. Divisional Manager, LIC and W.P.(C) 10690 & 3859 of 2008 3 another - 1996 (8) SCC 655 and the judgment of this Court in Secretary, Education Department and another v. T.M. Thankappan Achary and others - ILR 2007(3) Ker. 555. In these two judgments, according to the learned Government Pleader, a Government employee has been held to be outside the purview of the Act in view of the definition contained in sec.2(1)(o) of the Act. 4. However, learned counsel for the teacher has referred me to the various provisions of the Kerala Private College Teachers' Provident Fund as available under the Kerala University First Statute, 1976, the benefit of which is claimed by him. He has also referred me to the judgment of the Apex Court in Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Shiv Kumar Joshi - AIR 2000 SC 331. Going by the judgment in AIR 2000 SC 331 where claim of PF dues under the EPF Act was raised in a proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act and overruling the objections including the one raised relying on sec.2(1)(o) of W.P.(C) 10690 & 3859 of 2008 4 the Consumer Protection Act, the Supreme Court had upheld the order directing payment of the PF dues. 5. Therefore, in my view, AIR 2000 SC 331 is a judgment more appropriate to the facts of this case and is applicable to the case of the teacher. That apart, this objection has not been raised before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum while the matter was adjudicated, though it may be possible for the State to raise this contention, it being a legal argument. In any case, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in AIR 2000 SC 331, I am not inclined to agree with the learned Government Pleader and therefore W.P.(C) 10690 of 2008 filed by the Director and the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education seeking to quash the order of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in OP No.A.221/2003 and Exts.P5 and P6 revenue recovery notices will stand dismissed. 6. W.P.(C) 3859 of 2008 filed by the teacher will W.P.(C) 10690 & 3859 of 2008 5 stand allowed and there will be a direction to the respondents to take immediate steps for recovering the amount ordered by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alappuzha in OP No.A.221/2003 and pay the amount to the petitioner therein. The recovery shall be made as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent in W.P.(C) 3859 of 2008. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-