IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2011 / 1ST POUSHA 1933 WP(C).No. 34616 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CHENTHAMARA, S/O.CHIDAMBARAN, 9/342, PARATH HOUSE, KUDUMBU, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.H.BADARUDDIN SMT.NILA. C.V. SMT.B.SHAMEERA SRI.T.T.SUDHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PALAKKAD L678 001 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 3. KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WELFARE FUND BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PALAKKAD 678 001 R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MANU, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No./2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION IN RESPECT OF THEVEHICLE BEARING NO.KL 09P8456 EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT NO.P.Gd.9/147/2010 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PALAKKAD. EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 10.9.2011 EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE CITATION IN RAJESH VS. JOINT RTO (2009) (2) KHC 611 EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)NO.7411/2011(B) ON 9.3.2011 IN K.SELVARAJ V. RTO. / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.34616 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a tractor bearing registration No.KL-09-P 8456. He has filed this writ petition for a declaration that as the tractor owned by him is used for agricultural operations which are seasonal, he would not come within the scope of the expression “Motor Transport undertaking” as defined in section 2(h) of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to exempt him from making payment of contribution to the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund with immediate effect. The petitioner relies on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Rajesh v. Joint R.T.O (2009 (2) KLT 615) to contend that only those persons operating motor vehicles which carry passengers or goods or both for hire or reward will fall within the definition of the term “Motor Transport undertaking”, and therefore, as the petitioner uses his tractor only W.P(C).No.34616 of 2011 -:2:- for agricultural purposes which are seasonal in nature, he is not liable to pay contribution to the welfare fund. 2.I heard Sri.H.Badruddin, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Gopakumar, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.K.S.Manu, the learned standing counsel appearing for the third respondent. The vehicle owned by the petitioner is a tractor. The term “motor transport undertaking” is defined in section 2(h) of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985 to mean a motor transport undertaking engaged in carrying passengers or goods or both by road for hire or reward, and includes a private carrier. The term “private carrier” is not defined in the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985. Section 2(i) of the Act however states that the words and expressions used but not defined in the Act but defined in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 shall have the meaning respectively assigned to them in that Act. The term “private carrier” is defined in section 2(22) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to mean the owner of a transport vehicle other than a public carrier who uses that vehicle solely for the carriage of goods which are his property or the carriage of which W.P(C).No.34616 of 2011 -:3:- is necessary for the purposes of his business not being a business of providing transport, or who uses the vehicle for any of the purposes specified in sub-section (2) of section 42. 3. From the definition of the terms “motor transport undertaking” and “private carrier”, it is clear that the liability to pay contribution to the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund is only on vehicle owners operating vehicles for carrying passengers or goods or both, for hire or reward. In other words, as held by the Division of this Court in Rajesh v. Joint R.T.O (supra) only those employees who are engaged in goods vehicles or passenger vehicles are covered by the provisions of the Act. It has therefore to be necessarily held that the driver engaged by the petitioner to operate his tractor which is essentially used for agricultural purposes and is not used to carry goods or passengers for hire or reward cannot be said to be covered by the provisions of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985. In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction that in the event of the petitioner submitting an appropriate petition before the third respondent for a certificate to the effect that no amount is due from him by way of contribution W.P(C).No.34616 of 2011 -:4:- to the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund, the said authority shall consider the same in the light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Rajesh v. Joint R.T.O (2009 (2) KLT 615) and issue a certificate to that effect expeditiously and in any event within one month from the date of receipt of the application. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.34616 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 22nd December, 2011