IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 W.P(C).No. 579 of 2009(R) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ROYSON JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, ROYAL TOURS AND TRAVELS, 44/382 D, LISIE JUNCTION, KOCHI-682018. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM AT KAKKANADU. 2. JOINT R.T.O., ALUVA. 3. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, KALOOR, KOCHI-682017. 4. DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI 682024. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR (SR.) FOR R3 SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 579 OF 2009 R -------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th January, 2009 JUDGMENT Case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: Petitioner is a contract carriage operator. Petitioner's establishment is covered by the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme. Ext.P1 Certificate is produced. Complaint revolves around the refusal on the part of the taxing authority to receive the tax, citing the liability to pay the amounts due under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Scheme. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier and this Court had delivered Ext.P2 Judgment. Subsequent to the same, according to petitioner, petitioner has sold three vehicles and purchased four vehicles. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to the immunity from payment under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Scheme on account of the establishment being covered by the Employees' Provident Fund Act. WPC.579/09 R 2 2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Provident Fund Commissioner as also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent besides the learned Government Pleader. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: If the petitioner produces the Attendance Register, Wage Register/Salary Acquittance Register and any other document which the petitioner wishes to produce in support of his claim that all his employees are covered under the Employees' Provident Fund Act before the third respondent at 11 AM on 12.01.2009, the third respondent will look into the same and issue a communication to the petitioner, if the petitioner is so entitled, certifying that the petitioner's workers are covered by the Employees' Provident Fund Act. If such communication is produced before respondents 1 and 2, there will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to accept the tax without insisting on WPC.579/09 R 3 payment of any amount under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge