IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 2467 of 2010(G)
1. R.SUNDARESAN, S/O.RAMAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE WELFRE FUND INSPECTOR,
3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR,
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
5. SRI.RAJESH, S/O.SASIDHARAN PILLAI,
6. SRI.OMANAKUTTAN PILLAI,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.MOHANLAL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :27/01/2010
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
-----------------------------
W.P(C) No.2467 of 2010-G
------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
Challenging the order passed by the second respondent
determining the contribution payable by the petitioner under the
relevant provisions of the Kerala Toddy Workers’ Welfare Fund Act,
the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal under Section 8(5) of
the Act before Government, which is stated as pending. However, in
view of the coercive steps being pursued in the meanwhile, the
petitioner had also sought for an interim stay, which was granted by
the first respondent as per Ext.P4 order, subject to the condition
that the petitioner remitted 25% of the assessed amount within one
month from the date of receipt of the order.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner had approached the second respondent with the amount
to satisfy the condition imposed by the Government/appellate
authority vide Ext.P4. But the same was not accepted by the second
respondent stating that they have already forwarded necessary
requisition to the revenue authorities. This in turn was followed by
W.P(C) No.2467 of 2010-G 2
Ext.P6 notice issued by the third and fourth respondents under the
Revenue Recovery Act, which are sought to be intercepted by this
Court.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents 1, 3 and 4 and also the learned standing counsel, who
entered appearance on behalf of the second respondent. In view of
the nature of relief proposed to be given, this Court does not find it
necessary to issue notice to the fifth and sixth respondents.
4. In the above facts and circumstances, the second
respondent is directed to accept the payment to be tendered by the
petitioner in compliance with Ext.P4, if the same is deposited within
two weeks, subject to which, all further proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P6 shall be kept in abeyance. Considering the submission made
from the part of the petitioner that the statutory appeal preferred by
the petitioner has already posted for hearing before the first
respondent on 10.3.2010, there will be a direction to the first
respondent to have the matter considered and finalized in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within
three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
However, it is made clear that, if the petitioner satisfies the
W.P(C) No.2467 of 2010-G 3
condition imposed by the Government while granting interim stay
vide Ext.P4, the stay will continue till finalization of the appeal as
above.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
ab