IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2011 / 21ST SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 6594 of 2009(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VIJAYAN, K.V., S/O. VELU, 37/2907, (KARIPURATH HOUSE),. VELIYODIPARAMBU, PONOTH ROAD, KALOOR P.O., KOCHI -17. BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. EXECUTIVE OFFICER,MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD ERNAKULAM. 2. THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY(TAXATION) OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN. SRI. P. RAMAKRISHNAN, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: 6594/2009. --------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION PERTAINING TO THE VEHICLE AUTORICKSHAW HAVING REG. NO. KLF-6242. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF DRIVING LICENCE HAVING NO. 13/10925/1999 ISSUED TO PETITIONER. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF ELECTORAL CARD OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 15.3.2006 ISSUED TO PETITIONER. EXT.P4A TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 25.3.2008 ISSUED TO PETITIONER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.C.19895/2008 DATED 7.8.2008. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. TDS/ S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 6594 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 12th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a senior citizen and a registered owner of an autorickshow bearing Reg. No. KLF-6242. He himself is the driver of the vehicle. He wanted to remit motor vehicle tax in respect of the vehicle. But the 2nd respondent refused to accept tax on the ground that he must produce proof of payment of contributions under the Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has passed the age of superannuation prescribed under the Act and therefore the petitioner is not liable to pay any contribution under the Act. It is further submitted that even if the petitioner pays the contribution, it will not be accepted by the 1st respondent insofar as if they accept contributions, they will have to pay the benefits also. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i. To declare that the first respondent is not entitled to seek any clearance certificate or proof regarding remittance of contribution to the Motor Transport workers Welfare Fund Board in respect of the vehicle owned by the petitioner; ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, to accept the tax in respect of the vehicle owned by the petitioner being Registration No. LKF-6242 without insisting proof regarding remittance of contribution towards Motor Workers Welfare Fund. iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to reimburse the amount already been remitted by the petitioner vide Ext.P4 and P4A with interest.” W.P(C) No. 6594 of 2009 -: 2 :- 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader and the counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. 3. It is admitted by the counsel for the 1st respondent that the issue involved is covered by the decision of this Court in TA-Aleemul Islam Trust v. State of Kerala, 2009(4) KLT 225. When an age of superannuation is prescribed in the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act beyond which age, no person is entitled to be registered under the scheme, there is no point in insisting on contributions from the petitioner who is beyond the said age of superannuation. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the 2nd respondent is directed to accept motor vehicle tax in respect of the autorickshaw bearing Reg. No. KLF-6242 from the petitioner without insisting on proof of payment of contributions under the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act and scheme. If the petitioner has paid any amount as contributions for the period subsequent to attaining the age of superannuation prescribed in the Act, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/