IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32720 of 2005(T)
1. C.BALAN, S/O.LATE CHAMI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY(TAXES)
... Respondent
2. THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR,
3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY),
For Petitioner :SRI.KOSHY GEORGE
For Respondent :SRI.A.K.JOHN, SC, KTWWF BOARD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :15/09/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
= = = = = = = = == = = = == = = = = = =
W.P.(C) No. 32720 & 32753 OF 2005
= = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners in both the cases are the president / chief promoter of
the concerned society, formed by the workers who were the licensees of
the toddy shops and were liable to effect contribution under the Kerala
Toddy Workers’ Welfare Fund Act, 1969.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they were running the shops by
virtue of their office and not in their individual capacity. When there
occurred some default in regard to the contribution to be remitted to the
Fund, their personal assets were proceeded against, which made the
petitioners to approach this Court by filing these writ petitions wherein
appropriate interim orders have been passed. The learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that there cannot be any personal liability and that the
issue stands settled by virtue of the authoritative pronouncement of law on
the point by a Division Bench of this Court in Suseelan v. State of Kerala
(2002(1) KLT 226).
3. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the second
respondent as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the
other respondents.
WP(C) Nos. 32720 & 32753/2005 2
4. By virtue of the decision cited supra, it has been held that the
“employer”, as defined under Section 2(c) of the Act is a person who
employs the workers and that the person who employed the workers is the
‘Society’ and not the office bearer of the Society. Based on the above clear
finding, it was held by the Division Bench that the secretary or office bearer
of a Co-operative Society cannot be made personally liable for the default of
the Society.
In the above circumstance, this Court finds that the issue projected in
these writ petitions is squarely covered by the dictum as above.
Accordingly, the impugned notices are set aside and it is declared that the
petitioners or their personal properties are not liable to be proceeded against
in respect of the dues, if any, to be satisfied by the concerned Societies
under the Kerala Toddy Workers’ Welfare Fund Act. Both the writ petitions
are allowed, however, without any order as to costs.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
(JUDGE)
KNC/-