IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 143 of 2004(P) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ 1. K.MURALEEDHARAN, KOLLEDATH HOUSE, THAVANUR, MALAPPURAM. 2. P.BABU, PAKATH HOUSE, THAVARNUR, MALAPPURAM. 3. K.SUNDARAN, KOLLEDATH HOUSE, THAVARNUR, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO LABOUR, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, MALAPPURAM 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, PONNANI. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.C.NO.143/2004 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT DT. 15.10.1999. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE PERIOD 1999- 2001. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 15.2.2002. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT. 24.9.2003. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 20.3.2003 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFITS AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD 1999-2001. KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.143 of 2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 1st February, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner approached this court aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the Government under the provisions of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act. The main contention of the petitioners is that being a partnership affair, there is no question of appointing any employees, so as to make contribution under the above mentioned Act. It is seen from Ext.P5 appellate order that the contention has been considered by the Government in detail. It was found that the petitioner had not filed any objection in that regard and that the petitioner himself had given the names of employees in the bus and the number of days worked by them, and wages given to them. The shift in stand is only after the assessment. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be permitted to pay the outstanding balance in five equal monthly instalments, starting from the month of March, 2008. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.143 of 2004 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 1st February, 2008.