IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31216 of 2009(V) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- B.SASHIDHARAN,K.N.B.MOTORS, RENJANA,KARETTE,VAMANAPURAM,TRIVANDRUM, (S/C KL 16/E 5055,KL 01/S 3020,KL 01/X 8890, KL 01/W 3433,KL16/D 9393 AND GOODS CARRIAGE KL 01/ Y8464,KL 16/ B 9990) BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOLLAM. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ATTINGAL. 4. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,EMLPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WOKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW GEORGE,VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL RAHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P(C) NO. 31216 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009 JUDGMENT ---------------- Grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 1 to 3 are not accepting motor vehicles tax due with respect to vehicles owned by the petitioner, on insisting production of no objection certificate from the 5th respondent, to the effect that contributions due to Motor Workers Transport Welfare Fund has been cleared payment. According to the petitioner the establishment run by him is registered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 (hereinafter referred as the said Act) and the employees working in the motor transport undertaking owned by the petitioner are covered under the scheme framed under the said Act. Therefore it is contended that the motor transport undertakings owned by the petitioner are exempted from payment of contribution to the 5th respondent. 2. It is evident from Ext.P1 and P2 that the petitioner's establishment is covered under the provisions of the said Act and W.P(C) NO. 31216 OF 2009 2 that he is paying contributions under the scheme. Therefore primafacie it is evident that the petitioner is not liable for payment of any contribution to the 5th respondent. 3. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 to 3 to accept motor vehicles tax due with respect to vehicles owned by the petitioner, without insisting for production of no objection certificate of the 5th respondent. 4. It is made clear that if it is found at any time that the petitioner is liable for payment of contribution to the 5th respondent with respect to any of the vehicles, or that any of the vehicles for which the tax was accepted is not covered under the scheme formulated under the said Act, the acceptance of motor vehicle tax cannot be taken or considered as ground for non-payment of such amounts. C.K. ABDUL RAHIM pkk JUDGE W.P(C) NO. 31216 OF 2009 3 PKK