The petitioner, who was assessed under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, challenges the final determination order Exhibit P1, as confirmed in appeal by Exhibit P2. The petitioner admittedly was a stage carriage operator, who had employed two persons to operate the stage carriage, one being the Driver and the other being the Conductor. Provisional order was issued against the petitioner and he appeared initially. The petitioner was not present when one of the employees, the Driver gave evidence. The said employee deposed as to his employment as also to the employment of another person being the Conductor. The Assessing Officer, as is evidenced from Exhibit P1, issued notice against the petitioner to which he failed to respond. Subsequently, when the petitioner appeared, the petitioner W.P (C) NO. 1519 of 2011 2 continuously sought adjournments which were granted. On the consistent failure of the petitioner to appear and give evidence regarding the various aspects stated in the objection, the authorized officer concluded the determination under the Act, as per Exhibit P1. 2. In the appeal, the ground of violation of principles of natural justice was raised along with other contentions with respect to the petitioner having not employed the persons as also disputing the ownership of the vehicles. Again even before the appellate authority, no evidence was produced to substantiate the averments. The ground regarding violation of principles of natural justice was rightly negatived by the appellate authority on the finding that the records revealed sufficient notice having been taken out against the petitioner and the determination order having been concluded only on the consistent default of the petitioner. In such circumstances, there is nothing which would persuade this Court to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner had alternate contention regarding a representation before the Minister for Labour, which cannot be entertained by this Court since that is not a statutory remedy available to the petitioner.
W.P (C) NO. 1519 of 2011 3 The Writ Petition is deemed to be one challenging the appellate order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in view of the above findings rendered by this Court, the Writ Petition stands dismissed leaving the parties to suffer their costs.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE DMR/-