Kerala High Court
The Kerala Motor Trnsport Workers ... vs Somasundaran Pillai on 12 June, 2023
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
Monday, the 12th day of June 2023 / 22nd Jyaishta, 1945
WA NO. 1101 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/03/2023 IN WP(C) 8507/2015 OF THIS COURT.
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 :
1. THE KERALA MOTOR TRNSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY
ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND
BOARD,PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689645
BY ADVOCATE SRI. PRATHEESH.P.
RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 4:
1. SOMASUNDARAN PILLAI, S/O.RAHAVA KURUP,MEACHI HOUSE, V-KOTTAYAM P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 689656
2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF LABOUR, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3. V.S.GEORGE ,VALIPLACKAL HOUSE, PATHANAMATHITTA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA ,
PIN - 689645
BY ADVOCATE SRI. GEORGE SEBASTIAN FOR R1
Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased
to set aside the Judgment dated 23.03.2023 and dismiss the Writ Petition
in toto.
This Writ Appeal coming on for orders on 12/06/2023 upon perusing
the appeal memorandum, the court on the same day passed the following:
ALEXANDER THOMAS & C.JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
=========================
W.A. No. 1101 of 2023
(Arising out of impugned judgment dated 23.03.2023 in
W.P.(C)No.8507 of 2015)
=========================
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2023
ORDER
Alexander Thomas, J.
Admit W.A.
2. Issue notice to R1 and R3 by speed post, returnable within two weeks. Sri. K.P.Harish, learned Senior Government Pleader takes notice for R2, the State of Kerala.
3. It is urged by Sri. P.Pratheesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board herein, i.e., the appellant, that in the instant case, the 1 st respondent was engaged as a driver of the bus service run by R3 employer for the period from 2005-2010. Thereafter, R3 employer had surrendered the permit to run the bus and thus it appeared that R1 (driver) discharged from service in 2010 and at that time he was only 57 years of age. It is true that the employer had made contribution as per the scheme and Section 2(1)(i)(o) of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board Act, defines superannuation means termination of service of an employee by the employer or any other authorities so authorised when the employee W.A. No. 1101 of 2023 -2- reaches the age of sixty. Only in the event of superannuation can the appellants disburse the ex-gratia amount to the driver concerned. In the instant case, the superannuation process has not occurred and R1 was discharged from service prior to the superannuation and hence according to the appellants, he is not entitled to the ex-gratia payment. Further that, subsequently, an amendment has been made to the above said Act, whereby, Section 2(1)(i)(o) of the Act has been amended by allowing grant of ex-gratia benefits to those employees who had suffered termination of service even before the age of 60 years. The said amendment is prospective only from 2016 and hence same cannot regulate the case of the writ petitioner, who was discharged from service in 2010.
4. Taking note of the submissions, we find that a strong prima facie case is made out by the appellants. Since the appellants apprehend issuance of contempt of case proceedings by the writ petitioner for enforcement of the impugned verdict, the balance of convenience can also be kept in favour of the appellants. Accordingly it is ordered that the operation of impugned judgment dated W.A. No. 1101 of 2023 -3- 23.03.2023 rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C)No.8507/2015 will remain stayed and it shall be kept in abeyance. This interim order will be in force for a period of six weeks.
5. It appears that it is admitted in paragraph No.2 of the W.P. (C) that the employee' contribution has already been paid by the appellants to the 1st respondent. Learned Standing Counsel for the appellants will get instructions from the appellants as to whether the employer has made any contribution and whether the said amount can also be disbursed to the 1st respondent possibly with interest.
List the case on 11.07.2023.
H/o.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE uu/12.06.2023