IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2009 / 15TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 10944 of 2007(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ V.U.MOIDEEN HAJI, S/O.CHEKKU, VAZHAYIL UMMINIKADAVATH HOUSE, OTHUKKUNGAL P.O., TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LABOUR & REHABILITATION (S) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, MALAPPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC,KMTWF BOARD GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.SANIL KUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.10944/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE WITH CODE NO.KR/KK/17790 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION DT. EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER VIDE ORDER NO.EM/1475/02-03/B3 DT 22.12.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER VIDE ORDER NO.EM/1475/03-04/B3 DT 22.3.2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DT 9.4.05 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P2. EXT.P5: PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DT 9.4.2005 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P3. EXT.P6: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER G.O(RT) NO.2592/06/LBR DT 1.11.2006 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10944 OF 2007 (C) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the registered owner of Stage Carriage bearing Regn.No.KL-10/C.513. In this writ petition, what is under challenge is Exts.P2 and P3 assessment orders issued by the 2nd respondent under the provisions of the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act for the period 2002-03 and 2003-04. Petitioner challenged the assessment orders by filing Exts.P4 and P5 appeals, which were rejected by the 1st respondent as per Ext.P6. 2. The main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that their establishment is covered by the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act and therefore is liable to be excluded in view of the provisions contained in the proviso to Section 4(1) of the Welfare Fund Act. Ext.P1 is the order of coverage under the EPF Act. A reading of this order shows that the coverage is only for the period from September, 2003 and if that be so, atleast for the period prior to September, 2003 and covered by Exts.P2 and P3, petitioner will have to pay the dues under the Welfare Fund Act. However, he is WPC 10944/07 :2 : entitled to be excluded for the period thereafter. 3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: 1) That the petitioner shall produce documents before the 2nd respondent proving that his establishment is covered by the provisions of the EPF Act from September, 2003 as contended by him. 2) If satisfactory proof is produced as above, the 2nd respondent shall exclude the petitioner from the liability under the Welfare Fund Act for the period subsequent to September, 2003 and so long as the establishment continues under the coverage of the EPF Act. 3) It is clarified that it will be the liability of the petitioner to pay the dues till September, 2003 . ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp