Kerala High Court
P.B.Sunilkumar vs State Of Kerala on 27 March, 2024
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024/7TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
PETITIONERS:
1 P.B.SUNILKUMAR
AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. BALACHANDRAN,
PUNNAKKATHARAYIL HOUSE, MATHILAKAM.P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2 P.K. SUBRAMANIAN
S/O.KUMARAN, PUNNAKKATHARAYIL HOUSE,
MATHILAKAM.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.M.V.ANANDAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND REHABILITATION,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THAHSILDAR
KODUNGALLUR TALUK, P.O. KODUNGALLUR,
THRISSUR - 680 664.
SRI.VENUGOPAL, V., GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
2
JUDGMENT
Petitioners were partners of a firm, namely, 'Amruth
Liquors'. According to the petitioners, the firm consisted of 15
partners, including the petitioners. The petitioners state that in the
years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 the firm decided to participate in
the auction for the conduct of toddy shops in Kodungallur range
and the meeting of the partnership entrusted 5 of the partners,
including the petitioners herein, to apply for license. Accordingly,
license was granted in the name of the petitioners and three other
partners for conduct of toddy shops in Kodungallur range for the
years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000. Proceedings were initiated for
recovery of dues to the Toddy Workers Welfare Fund and an
assessment order dated 21.11.2001 was issued demanding the
payment of a sum of Rs.22,34,955/- (Rupees twenty two lakh
thirty four thousand nine hundred and fifty five only). According to
the petitioners, though initially the demand was on the five
persons in whose name the license was issued, on production of
the partnership deed and other records, the liability was fixed on
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
all the partners of the firm. The petitioners contend that the
assessment order dated 21.11.2001 was challenged before the
Government by filing an appeal under Section 8(4) of the Toddy
Workers Welfare Fund Act and on 28.03.2005 vide G.O.(Rt).
No.744/2005/LBR, the assessment order was set aside, directing
a de-novo enquiry. The petitioners contend that the original files
which were produced before the Government were lost in transit
and the petitioners could not, therefore, rely on those documents
during the course of the de-novo enquiry. The petitioners state
that though they asked for adjournment of the proceedings stating
that the enquiry cannot continue without the documents, the
Welfare Fund Inspector continued with the enquiry and issued
Ext.P1 assessment order on 27.01.2011. The petitioners filed a
statutory appeal against Ext.P1 order along with a stay petition.
The appeal and the stay petition are on record as Exts.P2 and
P2(a).
2. When revenue recovery proceedings were initiated to
recover the amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment, the
petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
No.29879/2011, which was disposed of on 09.11.2011, directing
the petitioners to make a deposit of 20% of the amount
demanded in Ext.P1 within one month. The petitioners admit that
no amount was paid in terms of the directions issued by this
Court in W.P.(C).No.29879/2011. According to the petitioners,
the appeal was posted for hearing on 17.05.2012. However, it
was adjourned and without disposing of the appeal, revenue
recovery proceedings had been initiated to recover the amount
demanded in Ext.P1. The petitioners have, therefore, approached
this Court seeking the following reliefs:
"i. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding
the 1st respondent to pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal
within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court
and until then stay all further proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P4 and P4(a).
ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding
the respondents to pass order on Ext.P5 within such
time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and until
then stay all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4
and P4(a)
iii. Issue such other orders, writs or directions as are
deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.
iv. Award cost of this proceedings to the petitioners."
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
3. The writ petition was filed in the year 2012. An interim
order was granted for a period of one month on 21.08.2012.
This order was extended by a period of three months on
20.09.2012. The interim order does not appear to have been
extended thereafter. Later, the matter came up for consideration
before this Court only on 15.06.2023 on which date it has been
adjourned and has now been listed before this Court today.
4. The learned Government Pleader would point out that
there is no challenge to Ext.P1 assessment order in this writ
petition and the Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board is not
a party to the present proceedings. He submits that Ext.P2
appeal would, in all probability, have been disposed of by now.
His instructions indicate that the hearing of the appeal was
scheduled on 28.09.2012.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Government Pleader, and considering the limited
nature of the relief sought for by the petitioners, I am of the
opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of directing that if
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
Ext.P2 appeal filed against Ext.P1 order of assessment has not
been disposed of even today, the 1 st respondent (Appellate
Authority) will endeavour to dispose of the appeal with notice to
the petitioners and the competent officer of the Kerala Toddy
Workers Welfare Fund Board, within a period of two months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after
affording an opportunity of hearing to both sides. Obviously, if the
appeal has already been disposed of, no further orders need be
passed in the matter. If the appeal has not yet been disposed of,
the interim order granted by this Court on 21.08.2012 will
continue till the appeal is disposed of by the first respondent.
This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
directions.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
nkr
WP(C) NO. 19761 OF 2012
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19761/2012
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.A3/KODUNGALUR/
DENOVO ENQ/1-86/99-2000/2011 DATED
27.01.2011.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 10.03.2011
EXHIBIT P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED
BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 10.03.2011
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED
11.05.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY
NOTICE ISSUED BY TEH 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE 1ST PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY
NOTICE ISSUED BY TEH 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE RESPONDENTS
1 AND 2 DATED 14.08.2012
