IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Con.Case(C).No. 824 of 2008(S)
1. RAVEENDRAN,S/O. PAPPU PILLA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SAHADEVAN, WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
For Respondent :SRI.RENIL ANTO,SC,KTWWF BOARD (TODDY WO
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :03/10/2008
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Cont.Case(C).No.824 of 2008-S
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008.
JUDGMENT
1.This contempt of court case is filed on the
allegation that the petitioner Raveendran was not
issued a clearance certificate by the respondent,
who is the Welfare Fund Inspector under the
Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board on
deposit of 50% of the dues for the abkari year
ending 31-3-2008, following the direction
contained in the judgment dated 14-3-2008.
2.In the affidavit filed by the respondent, it is
averred that on 26-3-2008, Shri.Krishnan T.S. had
approached the office of the Welfare Fund
Inspector and sought for clearance certificate
and he requested a chalan in the name of the
petitioner Raveendran. In view of that statement,
Shri.T.S.Krishnan was asked to appear and he was
COC824/08 -: 2 :-
administered oath and examined. He states that he
had not requested for issuance of chalan in the
name of Raveendran. He also states that after
chalan was issued for remittance, petitioner
Raveendran had himself paid the amounts and
cleared the outstandings.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner very
fairly states, on the query of this Court, that
the petitioner had participated in the auction
for the current abkari year also.
4.Going by the materials, it appears that the
petitioner Raveendran, the witness Krishnan T.S.
and Govindan and Benny Kurian were licensees who
had jointly obtained the licence for toddy shops
in Group No.10 of Thodupuzha Range for the abkari
year 2007-08. So much so, their liability is
joint and several and any private arrangement
between them regarding vending from the shops,
for their commercial convenience, need not be
taken note of by the officials. Neither the
COC824/08 -: 3 :-
Abkari officials nor the Toddy workers Welfare
Fund Inspector could be tied down to act in terms
of those arrangements. This essentially was the
reason why even the judgment dated 14-3-2008 was
issued by stating that the clearance certificate
shall be issued if the petitioner is entitled to
a clearance certificate on remittance of 50% of
the dues for the current abkari year.
On the facts in hand, I am satisfied that no case
of wilful disobedience could be attributed to the
respondent and that action under the Contempt of
Courts Act cannot be sustained.
For the aforesaid reasons, this contempt of court
case is dismissed.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.
Sha/041008