IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17042 of 2010(E)
1. SUNILKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. P.K.SUBRAMANIAN, S/O.KUMARAN,
Vs
1. TAHSILDAR, KODUNGALLUR TALUK,
... Respondent
2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),
3. THE TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,
4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
5. P.N.RAJENDRAPRASAD, S/O.LATE NARAYANAN,
6. P.N.RAGHUNANDANAN, S/O.LATE NARAYANAN,
7. P.S.ATHMAN, S/O.LATE SANKARANARAYANAN,
8. P.K.SOMANATHAN, S/O.LATE KITTU,
9. P.P.SUKUMARAN, PULIKKAL HOUSE,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :02/07/2010
O R D E R
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.17042 of 2010
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd July, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioners have filed this Writ Petition challenging
the Revenue Recovery action initiated against them for the
recovery of Toddy Workers Welfare Fund contributions.
2. The petitioners along with 13 others had formed a
partnership firm by name Amruth Liquors as per Ext.P1
agreement. Pursuant to the said agreement, the license
for conducting Toddy Shop Nos.1 to 86 of Kodungallur
range for the abkari year 1999-2000 was bid in auction in
the name of five partners including the petitioners. Since
there was difference of opinion between the partners,
some of them withdrew withdrawn from the partnership
agreement. According to the petitioners, the Welfare
Fund Inspector had conducted an enquiry and assessed
the welfare fund contribution in respect of the said shops.
The said assessment was challenged by two of the
partners before the Government by filing an appeal. The
Government set aside the said assessment and remitted
wpc No.17042/2010 2
the matter back to the Welfare Fund Inspector for fresh
assessment. According to the petitioners, thereafter no
enquiry has been conducted and the matter is kept
pending. At present, Revenue Recovery proceedings have
been initiated for recovery of the welfare fund
contributions from the other partners on the ground that
the persons who had not challenged the assessment order
could not get the benefit of the order passed by the
Government, setting aside the assessment. Accordingly,
the petitioners have now been issued with a Revenue
Recovery notice which is Ext.P7. The petitioners therefore
challenge Ext.P7. As per Ext.P5, the share due from each
of the petitioners has been fixed and therefore, the same is
also challenged herein.
3. Adv.Renil Anto who appears for the third
respondent submits that an enquiry is in progress, for the
purpose of passing the final determination order in respect
of Toddy Shop Nos.1 to 86 of Kodungallur range for the
abkari year 1999-2000. It is submitted that notices have
been issued to the petitioners and that they are
participating in the enquiry. Any amount would be
wpc No.17042/2010 3
recovered only after passing the final determination order
pursuant to the enquiry. In view of the above submission,
this Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the
proceedings to be expedited and keeping the Revenue
Recovery proceedings in abeyance till final orders are
issued by the third respondent.
4. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is
disposed of directing the third respondent to complete the
assessment proceedings and to pass final determination
orders in respect of the petitioners in accordance with
law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment. Pending issue of such final determination
orders against the petitioner, further proceedings based
on or pursuant to Exts.P5 and P7 shall be kept in
abeyance.
No costs.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN,
JUDGE
css/