IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 25913 of 2003(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.SOMAN, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, AGED 75, NEW BUNGLOW, KANYAKULANGARA, VEMBAYAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), NEYYATTINKARA. 4. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, KERALA TODDY WELFARE FUND BOARD, TRIVANDRUM. 5. C.CHANDRABABU, S/O. CHANDRASEKHARAN, KOCHUPUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, POONTHURA P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.RENIL ANTO, SC, KTWWF BOARD FOR R4 SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1,2,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.25913/2003 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B2/KAZHA.33-55/98-99 DT.31.12.2001 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.25.3.2002 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT.4.9.2002 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.25.9.2002 IN O.P.NO.27265/2002 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMO SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 15.11.2002. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDE G.O.(RT)NO.1972/03/LBR DT.17.7.2003 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.25913 OF 2003 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioner was one of the five licensees who were granted the privilege to sell toddy in Toddy Shop Nos.38 to 55 of Kazhakootam range for the year 1998-1999. When there was default in payment of Welfare Fund dues, the Welfare Fund Inspector passed Ext.P1 assessment order. The petitioner along with one Mr.Sivarajan challenged that order by filing Ext.P5 appeal. The Government, which is the appellate authority, heard and dismissed the appeal by Ext.P6 order. Hence, this writ petition is filed, challenging Exts.P1 and P6. 2. The main contention raised by the petitioner before this Court was that, the shop was being actually run by the 5th respondent and therefore, the petitioner was not liable. But going by the provisions of the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Act, all the licensees are liable for payment of the Welfare Fund dues. If a third party, who is not a licensee, is found to be actually running the shop, he can also be made liable. But, that W.P.(C) No.25913/2003 2 principle will not absolve a licensee from paying the dues for the reason that, he was not actually involved in the management of the shop. In view of the above position, there is nothing wrong with Ext.P6. The Government have rightly rejected the above said contention of the petitioner. Accordingly, the said order is affirmed and this writ petition is dismissed. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) ps