Disposed

V. Shereef v. District Labour Officer

Kerala HC4 Feb 2020WP(C)/31715/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a construction worker welfare cess assessment order, the High Court allowed 12 months for the petitioner to clear dues in equal monthly installments and stayed recovery proceedings pending payment without default.

What did the court decide?

Allowance of 12 months to clear the assessed dues in 12 equal monthly installments; recovery proceedings kept in abeyance on payment compliance.

V. Shereef Vs District Labour Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 15TH MAGHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).NO.31715 OF 2019(L)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

V. SHEREEF, EXCEL PLAZA, NELLOOR P.O., FEROKE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1 DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020.

¶11

2 ASSESSMENT OFFICER, BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS' WELFARE CESS ACT (DEPUTY LABOUR OFFICER), CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 020.

¶12

3 SECRETARY, KERALA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS' WELFARE BOARD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶13

4 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, KOZHIKODE-673 020.

¶14

R3 BY SRI.S.KRISHNA MOORTHY, SC

¶15

SRI RON BASTIAN S.C.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).NO.31715 OF 2019(L)

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner herein is the owner of a hotel by name ”Woodies Blesisure” situated at Kozhikode. Ext.P3 assessment order was passed by the Deputy Labour Officer, who is the assessing authority under the Building and other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (‘Act 28 of 1996’ for short), assessing a sum Rs.9,43,717/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Forty Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventeen Only) as Cess. The petitioner was ordered to effect payment of the amount assessed on or before 29.11.2018. The petitioner has mounted his challenge against Exhibit P3 order on various grounds and have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

¶21

i. issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Ext.P3 order;

¶22

ii. issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that petitioner who never engaged any worker, who was given registration as provided in the Kerala Construction workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1989, is not bound to pay any contribution as provided under Section 8 of the said Act;

¶23

iii. Issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that the contribution of the employer as contemplated under Section 8(2) of the Kerala Construction Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1989, is 1% of the cost of construction work and not 1% of the cost of construction;

¶24

iv. issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order

¶25

WP(C).NO.31715 OF 2019(L)

¶26

¶27

or direction restraining the respondents from taking coercive actions against the petitioner, to recover the amount demanded in Ext.P3 order, until the disposal of Exts.P4 and P5;

¶28

v. issue such other writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, fair and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶29

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, the contentions raised by the petitioner, based on the provisions of the Kerala Construction Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1989 cannot be sustained as the assessment was made in accordance with Act 28 of 1996 which is an Act passed by the Parliament.

¶30

In response to the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, Sri Babu Joseph Kuravanthazha, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his limited prayer is only to permit the petitioner herein to clear off the amounts due in equal monthly installments and prays that necessary orders be issued.

¶31

Having regard to the fervent submissions advanced by the learned counsel and the alleged impecunious circumstances pleaded by the petitioner herein, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted 12 months time to clear off the entire dues covered under Ext.P3.

¶32

In the result, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms:

¶33

WP(C).NO.31715 OF 2019(L)

¶34

¶35

i) The petitioner shall produce the certified copy of this judgment before the respondents within two weeks from today.

¶36

ii) The 1^st respondent shall quantify the amounts due from the petitioner and inform the petitioner in writing, within a week therefrom, detailing the amount due along with interest as on 04.02.2020.

¶37

iii) The respondents shall grant twelve equal monthly installments and the first installment shall be payable on 01.03.2020.

¶38

iv) The recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance if the petitioner continues to pay the amounts as ordered by this Court without any default.

¶39

v) On the petitioner committing default of payment of any two installments, the respondents may recommence the recovery proceedings.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

¶44

WP(C).NO.31715 OF 2019(L)

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

¶48

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE TYPED COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 22.12.2017 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶49

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE TYPED COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 15.09.2018 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶50

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2018 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶51

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.11.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶52

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.08.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶53

EXHIBIT P5 (a) TRUE COPIES OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 20.08.2019 AND THE CONFIRMATION OF DELIVERY OF EXT.P5 AT THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶54

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

¶55

//TRUE COPY//

¶56

P.A TO JUDGE

V. Shereef v. District Labour Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Shereef v. District Labour Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kerala Automobiles Ltd., Vs the Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner

Sahil Vs the District Executive Officer

The Assistant Engineer Vs Krishna Kumar

P.Sivasankara Mannadiar Vs State of Kerala

Saroj.C. Vs the District Collector

M/S. X Print Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited