The petitioner is the registered owner of a stage carriage vehicle bearing registration No. KL 12/B-8425, having purchased the same from its earlier owner on 28.08.2008. Necessary endorsement was also made in the Registration Certificate transferring the ownership to the petitioner effective from that date. However, on approaching the first respondent for remittance of tax, the petitioner was directed to get a clearance certificate from the 2nd respondent with respect to the satisfaction of the amounts due under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985 as stipulated in Section 8A of the said enactment. 2. The petitioner hence approached this Court and this Court was pleased to direct the petitioner to make prospective remittance under the enactment and also directed the first respondent to accept the tax pending adjudication of the dispute. The petitioner, admittedly, has been remitting the tax as also the welfare fund contribution due from the date of his purchase of the vehicle. This Court by an interim order dated 12.02.2009 also specifically directed the petitioner to file an undertaking before this Court that the vehicle will not be transferred. The said direction has been complied and an undertaking was filed before this Court on 12.02.2009.
3. Despite notice being issued to the additional 3rd respondent, who is said to be the earlier registered owner, none has appeared for the said party. The petitioner has been operating the stage carriage on the strength of the interim order. No purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending since, ultimately the dispute cannot be adjudicated under Article 226. The Act specifically provides for a determination order to be passed by the 2nd respondent. It is also pertinent that by sub-section (2) of Section 10, the Act creates a charge on the vehicle, for satisfaction of any arrears towards the contribution due under the Act. If the 3rd respondent who is said to be the earlier registered owner of the vehicle, who had committed default for the earlier period, does not turn up and satisfy the amounts due, for release of the vehicle encumbrance free, necessarily the petitioner would have to satisfy the dues.
4. In any event, no determination order as such is passed till now. The petitioner is directed to approach the 2nd respondent and submit an application for passing determination order for the earlier periods. On the petitioners application, necessarily under Section 8 the second respondent would have to conduct an enquiry after issuing notice to the additional 3rd respondent as also any employees who were working under the additional 3rd respondent. A determination order shall be passed under section 8 after giving opportunity, to all the affected parties, who seek the same. In any event, the order shall be passed within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent. The recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till such orders are passed and thereafter that order shall determine the issue and the petitioner shall be liable to pay the amount if it is not satisfied by the additional 3rd respondent. The petitioner would have the liberty to proceed against the additional 3rd respondent; if so advised. Needless to say that the interim order passed on 12.02.2009 permitting the provisional acceptance of the motor vehicle tax shall continue for a period of six months and so retained would be the undertaking filed by the petitioner before this Court.
Writ petition disposed of as above. No costs.
Sd/-
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge