IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34160 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- LEELA KUMARAN, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O.LATE KUMARAN, KARAMEL HOUSE, KAYANAD, OORAMANA P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 730. BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND SMT.B.MEERA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KAZHAKUTTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. 5. SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN A.P., AMRAPALIKAL HOUSE, VALLIKUNNU NORTH P.O., KADALUNDI NAGAR, CALICUT DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC,KMTWF BOARD FOR R3 SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 34160 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance projected in the Writ Petition is in respect of the non acceptance of the share of contribution proposed to be effected by the petitioner in respect of the period between Exts.P1and P3, during which the petitioner was the owner of the medium goods carriage bearing No. KL-10-M-2768. It is stated that the petitioner has purchased the vehicle from the 5th respondent and has now sold the vehicle to somebody else. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 08.12.2009, the amount has been paid and the same has been accepted by the 3rd respondent, without prejudice to the right to realize the arrears, if any, due with respect to the vehicle. 3. In the above circumstance, particularly in view of the submission made from the part of the respondents that no steps are being pursued against the petitioner in respect of any dues pertaining to the vehicle in question, no further orders are necessary and the Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc