IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34780 of 2009(N)
1. NAVAJEEVAN TRUST,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
3. DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
4. ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY,
For Petitioner :SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :03/12/2009
O R D E R
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.34780 OF 2009
------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009
J U D G M E N T
———————-
1. Grievance of the petitioner is that Motor Vehicles Tax
with respect to vehicles owned by them is not received by the 4th
respondent, insisting production of No-objection Certificates
evidencing payment of contributions due to the Motor Transport
Workers Welfare Fund. According to the petitioner it is a trust
engaged in activity for rehabilitation and treatment of people
who are suffering from mental and physical illness, and with
respect to whom there is none to look after. It is also stated that
the petitioner is undertaking food supply to the poor persons
undergoing treatment in Medical College Hospital, and is also
helping people who are physically and mentally ill and
handicapped. For the purpose of carrying out the above said
charitable activities the petitioner is using 3 vehicles owned by
them bearing Regn: No:KL-5/J-8772, KL-5/M-6484 and KL-5/Y-
6257. According to the petitioner the vehicles owned by them
cannot be termed as motor transport undertakings coming
within the provisions of Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare
Fund Act and as such they are not liable to pay contributions
W.P.(C).34780/09-N 2
with respect to the drivers engaged in those vehicles. It is
further contended that the drivers who are in charge of the
vehicles are not ‘paid employees’ but they are voluntary workers
who are engaged in the activities of the petitioner trust. The
petitioner relies on a decision of this court in Rajesh Vs. Joint
R.T.O. (2009 (2) KLT 615) in support of their contentions.
2. However, I am of the opinion that the liability for
payment of contributions to the Motor Transport Workers
Welfare Fund is not an issue arising for consideration in this writ
petition. Since there exist a dispute in relation to that liability I
am of the opinion that a provisional direction can be issued to
the 4th respondent to accept the Motor Vehicle Tax due with
respect to the above vehicles, without prejudice to the rights of
the respondents 2 and 3 to claim and recover contributions if any
due under law. It is pointed out by the petitioner that disputing
such liability the petitioner had filed Ext.P4 before the 2nd
respondent. It is for the respondents 2 and 3 to take a decision
regarding such liability.
3. Under the above circumstances, without prejudice to
the rights of respondents 2 and 3 to demand and collect
contributions due to the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund,
if found liable on adjudication of Ext.P4, the 4th respondent is
W.P.(C).34780/09-N 3
directed to receive Motor Vehicle Tax due with respect to the
above said three vehicles on a provisional basis.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above
observations.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
okb