Abdul Rahiman T.P vs The District Executive Officer

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
         WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944
                            WP(C) NO. 21621 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              ABDUL RAHIMAN T.P,
              S/O. K.MOIDU, RASHEEBAS HOUSE,
              ITTAMMAL, AJANUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671531

              BY ADVS.
              G.HARIHARAN
              PRAVEEN.H.
              K.S.SMITHA


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
              KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND,
              KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671531

     2        THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
              EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION,
              REGIONAL OFFICE, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM - 682017

     3        THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
              SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KANHANGAD,
              KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671531

              BY ADV THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL
              SRI.K.S.MANU


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21621 OF 2022
                                  2


                           JUDGMENT

Long and short of the grievance of the petitioner in the instant case is that having purchased the bus bearing No.KL-63B- 7020 from the previous owner and having obtained the transfer of the ownership of the vehicle through the office of the respondent No.3, since the petitioner was not covered, intended, to make the payment of contribution towards Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund, but the respondent No.1 is not accepting the same, though the vehicle was covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Contribution towards EPF by the 4th respondent had already been paid upto October, 2021 whereas the vehicle was transferred on 27.11.2021.

2. Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, learned counsel representing the respondent No.2 submits that the department would not be having any aversion in issuing the no-due certificate but the grievance as sought in the petition is against the respondent No.1 - District Executive Officer.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, I WP(C) NO. 21621 OF 2022 3 dispose of the writ petition by issuing direction to the respondent No.1 to accept the application of the petitioner and in case they require no-due certificate from the concerned department with regard to the coverage of the vehicle under EPF as assigned to the previous purchaser, 2nd respondent would also issue a no-due certificate to the petitioner on receipt of request to that effect from the petitioner, so that the charges under the Welfare Fund can be accepted. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of forty five days (45) from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak WP(C) NO. 21621 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21621/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF BUS NO KL-63B-7020 AFTER EFFECTING TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF BUS NO.KL63B-7020 WHILE IT WAS IN THE NAME OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMBINED CHALLAN OF ACCOUNT NO.01, 02, 10, 21 & 22 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RS. 6,840/ Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER MADE IN W.P.(C).NO. 20720/2022 DATED 24.06.2022