Shameena Mohammed v. District Executive Officer, Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board, Regional Transport Officer, Kozhikode, and Joint Regional Transport Officer, Koduvalli, Kozhikode

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936** ## **WP(C).No. 29392 of 2014 (Y)** ## **----------------------------** ## **PETITIONER :** **-----------------------** ## **SHAMEENA MOHAMMED, AGED 22 YEARS, W/O.MOHAMMED, ARAKAMBRACHALIL HOUSE, KARUVANPOYIL P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** - **----------------------------** ## **1. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER,** **KERALA MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, C.H.CROSS ROAD, EAST NADAKAVU, KOZHIKODE -673 011.** **2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020** **3. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE - 673 572.** **R1 BY ADV. NAVEEN.T** **R2 & R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** **WP(C).No. 29392 of 2014 (Y) ----------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------** **P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL** **/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE** **==> picture [15 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **----- Start of picture text -----**<br> sts<br>**----- End of picture text -----**<br> ## **P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------** ## **W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014** ## **--------------------------------------Dated this the 26[th] day of November, 2014.** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner is aggrieved of the refusal on the part of respondents 2 and 3 in accepting the tax payable under the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act in respect of the vehicle bearing No.KL-11/M-5142, which was purchased by the petitioner in April, 2013, for want of production of proof regarding the clearance of the liability under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act, in terms of the relevant provisions incorporated in the statute. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, prior to the purchase of the vehicle, it was in the ownership of somebody else, who had satisfied the tax and the Fitness Certificate was expired on 30.09.2014. When the petitioner approached the Departmental Authorities to renew the Fitness Certificate and to satisfy the tax agreeing to satisfy the entire amount fell in arrears, after the date of purchase, the same was not acceded to, insisting for _W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014_ **2** production of proof regarding the clearance under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act as well, which made the petitioner to approach this Court with the following prayers: _“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3[rd] respondent to accept the tax of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/M-5142 and renew the permit to the petitioner._ _ii. Issue a writ or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to pay the contribution of Kerala Motor Transport Welfare Fund from the date on which the petitioner has become registered owner of the vehicle._ _iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1[st] respondent to initiate steps to recover the arrears of contribution towards the Kerala Motor Transport Welfare Fund from the erstwhile owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/M-5142._ _iv. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1[st] respondent to accept the tax of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/M-5142 without insisting the petitioner to produce the payment of receipt of contribution towards the Kerala Motor Transport Welfare Fund._ _v. Issue such other order, writ or direction as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”_ 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondent as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. ## 4. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice _W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014_ **3** of this Court that, the liability to satisfy welfare fund contribution under the Kerala Motor Transport Welfare Fund runs along with the vehicle after the amendment of the statute, effected in the year 2005 and as such, the date of purchase of the vehicle by the petitioner is having no significance at all. It was for the petitioner to have made necessary enquiry and to have cleared the due amount before the vehicle was purchased, if at all she wanted to shift the liability in this regard. Having not chosen to pursue any such course, it is for the petitioner to satisfy the entire liability, submits the learned Standing Counsel as well as the learned Government Pleader. 5. Similar issue had come up for consideration before this Court in a batch of writ petitions and as per common judgment dated 10.10.2014 in WP(C) No.37641 of 2008, the issue has been settled, giving the following directions: _“1. In those cases were the transfers of the vehicles have been effected prior to 07.06.2005, the liability to discharge the welfare fund dues under the 1985 Act would continue to be with the erstwhile owner of the vehicle and accordingly, the authorities under the 1985 Act would have to proceed against such owners for realisation of the dues. As a consequence, the insistence by the Motor_ _W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014_ **4** _Vehicles Taxation Authorities, for discharge of liabilities of the erstwhile owner, as a precondition for accepting tax from the subsequent owner, would have to be declared as illegal and I do so._ _2. In cases were the transfer of the vehicle has been occasioned after 07.06.2005, the liability of the erstwhile owner of the vehicle, in respect of the dues under 1985 Act, would be a charge on the vehicle and go along with the vehicle to the transferee of the vehicle. Accordingly, the transferee of the vehicle would be liable to discharge the dues of the erstwhile owner under the 1985 Act. In such cases the action of the authorities under the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act insisting on a clearance of the erstwhile owner's dues, by the subsequent owner, as a condition for accepting tax from him, is held to be legal and valid and the notices, if any issued in that regard, are sustained._ _3. In cases covered by (2) above, wherever the transferee has effected payment of dues pertaining to the erstwhile owner, it shall be open to the said transferee to proceed against the erstwhile owner, for realisation of the amounts paid on behalf of the erstwhile owner and in discharge of the latter's liability under the 1985 Act._ _4. The demands that have been made against the petitioners, which have been held to be legal and valid in this judgment, shall be satisfied by the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As it is noticed that, during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioners have all been permitted to effect payment of Motor Vehicle tax by way of interim orders of this Court and, therefore, no further directions are required in that regard.”_ 6. By virtue of the position as above, this Court finds that the petitioner cannot avoid the liability and it is for the petitioner to satisfy the liability to the 1[st] respondent and produce proof for _W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014_ **5** remitting tax in respect of vehicle for the relevant period. 7. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondent submits that, the vehicle was never registered with the 1[st] respondent and that the contribution was paid only up to December, 2009. The balance amount to be cleared, including November, 2014, is to an extent of Rs.11,800/- (Rupees Eleven thousand and eight hundred only) and if the petitioner remits the said amount, necessary clearance can be given, submits the learned counsel. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is ready to satisfy the said liability. 9. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to satisfy the said amount to the 1[st] respondent, upon which, necessary clearance shall be issued and on production of the same before the 2[nd] respondent, the tax, additional tax, if any, and such other amounts payable under the other relevant heads in respect of the said vehicle, for the period for which it is due, shall be accepted and necessary endorsement shall be made, so as to enable the petitioner to operate the vehicle, in accordance _W.P.(C) No.29392 of 2014_ **6** with law. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 1[st] respondent, for further steps. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ## **P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE** sp