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
