IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33753 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. P.I. ELIAS, PAREKKARA HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. P.I. JOY, PAREKKARA HOUSE,KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. KURIAN P.ISSAC, PAREKKARA HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 4. BINU P.ISSAC, PAREKKARA HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SMT.CHITRA. G. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, IDUKKI, PIN -685 502. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 035. 3. THE KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 017. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN. R2 BY ADV. MR.M.K.C. DAS, SC, EPF. MR.M.CHANDRA BOSE. R3 BY ADV. MR.P. RAMAKRISHNAN, SC, KMTWFB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 33753 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 9th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Grievance of the petitioners is regarding non- acceptance of Motor Vehicles Tax with respect to vehicles owned by them, insisting on production of proof regarding payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund. 2. According to the petitioners, their establishments are covered under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act for short) and they are regularly paying contributions with respect to the workers employed in the motor transport undertakings to the E.P.F. Scheme. Therefore, the petitioners are not liable to pay contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund. 3. Going by provisions of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act, it is evident that the provisions W.P.(C) No. 33753/2010 2 of the said Act will not be applicable with respect to any undertaking to which the EPF Act will apply. Exts.P1 to P4 documents are produced in order to prove that the establishments of the petitioners are covered under the provisions of the EPF Act and the Scheme formulated thereunder. 4. The legal position as contended by the petitioners was conceded by learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the insistence on production of proof regarding payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund, for the purpose of accepting Motor Vehicles Tax in the case of the petitioners, is unnecessary. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to accept Motor Vehicles Tax due with respect to vehicles owned by the petitioners 1 to 4, without insisting on production of proof regarding payment of contributions to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund, subject to the condition that the petitioners W.P.(C) No. 33753/2010 3 producing proof regarding remittance of contributions to the EPF Scheme with respect to the workers employed in motor vehicles owned by them. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.