IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 32389 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- MATHEW ALEX VELLAPPALLY, MANAGING PARTNER, VELLAPPALLY BROTHERS, VELLAPPALLY BUILDING, VELLAPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM-1. BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SMT.G.CHITRA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. PIN-686 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, CHALAKKUZHI BUILDING, C.MS.COLLEGE ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001. 3. THE KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KOTTAYAM-686 002. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN, R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITOOP, S.C, E.P.F ORGANISATION, R3 BY ADV. SRI. P. RAMAKRISHNAN, S.C, K.M.T.W.W.F.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2010,ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO.32407/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) Nos. 32389 & 32407 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT W.P.C. No.32389 of 2010 is filed by the Managing Partner of a partnership firm and W.P.(C) No. 32407 of 2010 is filed by the said person, representing a company as its Managing Director. Grievance voiced in these writ petitions relates to non-acceptance of Motor Vehicles Tax, with respect to vehicles owned by the petitioners, insisting on production of proof regarding payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that, both the firm and the company were already registered under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act for short) and that they are paying contributions to the Employees Provident Scheme with respect to workers engaged in the motor transport establishments. Exts.P1 and P2 in both these cases are documents produced in support of the W.P.(C) No. 32389/2010 & con. case. 2 above contention. Being an establishment covered under the provisions of the EPF Act, the petitioners are not liable to pay contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund, is the contention. The question now stands covered in favour of the petitioner through various decisions of this Court. 3. Heard; learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3, who conceded the legal position and also the fact that the petitioner's establishments are covered under the EPF Act. 4. Under the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that the writ petitions can be disposed of directing the respondents to accept the Motor Vehicles Tax due with respect to vehicles owned by the petitioner's establishments, on production of proof regarding payment of contributions under the EPF Act. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to accept Motor Vehicles Tax due with respect to the vehicles owned by the petitioner's W.P.(C) No. 32389/2010 & con. case. 3 establishments without insisting for production of proof regarding payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund, subject to production of proof regarding payment of contributions under the E.P.F. Act. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.