Kerala High Court
S.D.Ajithkumar vs State Of Kerala on 7 September, 2012
Author: Harun-Ul-Rashid
Bench: Harun-Ul-Rashid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/16TH BHADRA 1934
WP(C).No. 19329 of 2012 (M)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------
S.D.AJITHKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.DIVAKARAN, SREEBHAVAN, MARUTHADI P.O.
KOLLAM DIST-691003
BY ADVS.SRI.C.RAJENDRAN
SMT.R.S.SREEVIDYA
RESPONDENTS:
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION (S),
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARAIT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER
KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE BOARD
KOLLAM-691001
3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
KOLLAM-691001
BY ADV. SRI.D.SAJEEV BABU, SC, KMTWWFB
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 19329 of 2012 (M)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: REGISTRATION BOOK OF VEHICLE KL-02/R-7033.
EXT.P2: CERTIFICATE OF FITNESS ISSUED BY THE RTO, KOLLAM DTD.
13.2.2005.
EXT.P3: ORDER VIDE NO.C1-013703/2005 DTD.04.05.2005.
EXT.P4: JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.15048/2006.
EXT.P5: ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DTD. 4.6.2008.
EXT.P6: FINAL ORDER PASSED BY R2.
EXT.P7: ORDER PASSED BY R1 DTD. 7.6.2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
......
// TRUE COPY //
P.A TO JUDGE.
HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.
------------------------
W.P.(C).No.19329 Of 2012
----------------------
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2012.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is aggrieved by the final determination of his liability as Rs.94,914/- towards Motor Transport Workers Welfare Funds Scheme by the 2nd respondent and the dismissal of his appeal by the 1st respondent confirming the findings of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent passed Ext.P6 order finally determining the liability of the petitioner as Rs.94,914/- for the period 2001-2005 towards liability under the Motor Transport Workers Welfare Funds Scheme.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and standing counsel for the 2nd respondent.
3. On a reading of Ext.P6 order, it is clear that though the petitioner submitted objections to the preliminary assessment, he did not substantiate his contentions by prosecuting the matter. Therefore, the 2nd respondent confirmed the preliminary assessment and fixed the liability. The appellate authority passed Ext.P7 order. The appellate authority in Ext.P7 observed that even after giving sufficient opportunities, the appellant did not produce any evidence to prove his contentions ::2::
W.P.(C).No.19329 Of 2012 that his vehicle has no pucca permit. The appeal was listed for hearing on 4.5.2011, 28.10.2011, 5.1.2012 and 2.2.2012. On all posting the case was got adjourned by the counsel for the appellant. Neither the appellant nor his counsel attended on 25.4.2012 also and therefore, the appellate authority decided the matter in the absence of the petitioner.
4. Considering the fact that the liability was fixed without considering the contentions raised by the petitioner and in the light of the fact that the appeal was decided on merits in his absence, this Court is of the view that one more opportunity shall be given to the petitioner to substantiate his case.
5. Therefore, Ext.P7 order is set aside. There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to re-consider the appeal afresh and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The recovery proceedings, if any, initiated shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge.
bkn/-