G RAJENDRAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners challenge Exts. P3 to P8. Ext. P3 is only an enquiry notice. Exts. P4 and P5 are provisional determination orders. Those order has resulted in final determination in Exts. P6 and P7 quantifying the amount payable by the petitioners towards contribution to Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund. One employee named G. Rajendran shown in the Appendix to those orders is found to be an employee of the van owned by the petitioners. Therefore the contribution in respect of the said employee is demanded in Ext. P7. It was not remitted. This resulted in revenue recovery notice as evidenced by Ext. P8. It is in the above circumstances, this Original Petition is filed challenging Exts. P6, P7 and P8.

(2.) The main contention urged by the petitioners that the employee made mention of in the appendix to Exts. P6 to P8 is none other than one among the partners. Copies of the partnership deeds are produced as Exts. P1 and P2. Serial No. 2 in Ext. P1 is the person made mention of as employee in Exts. P6 and P7. He is a partner. So, there is no employer - employee relationship. So, no contribution is payable towards Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund, counsel for the petitioners submits.

(3.) It is submitted by the counsel for the Welfare Fund that the partnership deed cannot be accepted as it is not executed in the stamp paper worth as required in the Stamp Act. Therefore, the petitioners ought to have remitted the amount quantified or else filed an appeal. When an appeal is not filed, the determination orders have become final and the petitioners are liable to remit the amount. Failure to remit the amount has resulted in the revenue recovery proceedings. There is nothing illegal. It is further submitted that in Ext. R5(b), the deposition, the petitioner has shown preparedness to enroll the workmen concerned in the welfare fund.