IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2009 / 3RD BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24271 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. T.SUDHEESHAN, S/O. NADESHAN, ANUPAMA BHAVAN, AYROOR P.O., POTHENCODE. 2. R.SANTHOSH KUMAR, S/O. RAGHUNATHAN, VAYALIL VEEDU, PANDAKASHALA, SHARKARA, CHIRAYINKEEZHU. 3. ANIL PRASAD, S.P.LAND, CHIRAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR. R.S.KALKURA MR. M.S.KALESH MR. HARISH GOPINATH MR. V.VINAY MENON RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (LABOUR), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SASIDHARAN, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, SHIBU NIVAS, MUTHANA, CHEMARATHI PANCHAYATH, VARKALA. R1 AND R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.K. BABU R2 BY ADV. MR. RENIL ANTO, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 24271 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 25th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Challenging Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the authority under the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act, the petitioner had preferred Ext.P2 memorandum of appeal and since the same was not considered and finalized, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C) 17043 of 2009, which led to Ext.P5 verdict, whereby the first respondent was directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 appeal, simultaneously directing to keep all further proceedings for realization of the due amount allegedly due from the petitioner in abeyance, on condition that, the petitioner remitted a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs within one month as specified. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, despite the specified direction given by this Court, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was stated as rejected, as per Ext.P6 order dated 25.6.2009 i.e. on the same day, on which Ext.P5 judgment was passed by this Court, which hence is subjected to challenge in this Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, absolutely no notice whatsoever was served upon the petitioner at the time of the assessment. The position stands to be the same, when Ext.P2 appeal was chosen to be finalized by the 1st respondent, as per Ext.P6 and no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner in this regard as WP (C) No. 24271 of 2009 : 2 : well. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents also conceded that, no such notice is stated as issued or referred to in Ext.P6. 4. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that Ext.P6 order passed by the first respondent is not correct of sustainable and it cannot have existence any further. Accordingly, Ext.P6 is set aside and the first respondent is directed to reconsider Ext.P2 appeal in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also to the second respondent, which exercise shall be pursued and finalized as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. In view of the stipulation made by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs as a precondtion and since the petitioner did not get any opportunity to comply with the said condition since the appeal was stated as disposed of without hearing him vide Ext.P6 (stated as passed on the same of passing Ext.P6 verdict), the petitioner is permitted to effect the said deposit within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE WP (C) No. 24271 of 2009 : 3 : kmd