M.K. Shyamala vs State Of Kerala on 13 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
M.K. Shyamala vs State Of Kerala on 13 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 24518 of 2008(R)


1. M.K. SHYAMALA, W/O.MUKUNDAN (LATE),
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR.

4. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),

5. K.M. VALSALAN, S/O. CHATHUKUTTY,

6. T. MANOHARAN, S/O. KUNHAPPA NAIR,

7. KADANKODAN PRASANTHAN,

8. VIJAYAN, CHEMBILODU AMSOM,

9. V.V. SREEJITH KUMAR,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :13/08/2008

 O R D E R
                         S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                ------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C)No.24518 OF 2008
              ----------------------------------------
               Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenges proceedings initiated under the

Revenue Recovery Act as per Ext.P12 notice to recover

contributions payable by the petitioner under the Kerala Motor

Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act. The petitioner is not

entitled to the reliefs prayed for on several grounds. First is that

Ext.P12 notice is dated 18.12.2007, which is being challenged on

12.8.2008. Secondly, the recovery proceedings are for recovery

of dues for the year 1994-1995. Admittedly, The petitioner was

served with a final determination order computing amounts due

from the petitioner under the Act. The petitioner had challenged

the same before the Government, which was dismissed by Ext.P5

order as early as on 31.10.2003. That order has not been

subjected to challenge within any reasonable time. Further by

Ext.P6 notice dated 3.8.2004, in view of the dismissal of the

appeal by Ext.P5, the petitioner has been directed to show cause

W.P.(c)No.24518/08 2

why advance contributions for the subsequent period should

not be demanded from her. That being so, the liability of the

petitioner has become final and cannot now be subjected to

challenge on any ground, especially in view of the long lapse of

time of more than five years. In the above circumstances, the

petitioner limits his prayer for a direction to respondents 2 to 4

to permit the petitioner to pay off the amounts demanded, as

per Ext.P12, in instalments.

2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the 2nd respondent also.

3. Having heard both sides, I feel that some leniency

can be shown to the petitioner, who is stated to be an old lady,

in the matter of permitting her to pay the amounts covered by

Ext.P12, in instalments.

Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction

to respondents 2 to 4 to permit the petitioner to pay the

amount covered by Ext.P12 in six equal monthly instalments

starting from 1.9.2008. Every subsequent instalment shall be

paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If

the petitioner pays the instalments on the due dates, further

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P12 shall be kept in abeyance.

W.P.(c)No.24518/08 3

However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any

one instalment, it would be open to respondents 2 to 4 to

continue proceedings in accordance with Ext.P12 without

having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *