SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Ker) 340

V.RAMKUMAR, K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
V. M. Khalid – Appellant
Versus
The State of Kerala, Labour & Rehabilitation (S) Department, Represented by the Commissioner – Respondent


Judgment :-

Radhakrishnan, J.

A learned single judge of this court in Kunhipokku v. District Executive Officer (1993 (2) KLT Sh. Notes (Case No.4)), while dealing with the power of condonation of delay in sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) felt that in case Government is not entertaining the appeal filed beyond the period prescribed therein the aggrieved party can invoke clause 83 of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Scheme, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “the Scheme”) which confers power on the Government to remove difficulties. The learned judge felt that power under clause 83 is akin to what is possessed by Section 19-A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 which enables removal of difficulties arising under the said Act.

2. Petitioner felt that his petition filed beyond the statutory period prescribed under sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Act could be entertained by the Government invoking clause 83 of the Scheme especially in the light of the decision in Kunhipokku’s case, supra. Government vide Ext.P15 letter dated 11.01.2006 however













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top