CENTRAL BOARD, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION AND ORS. Vs. EMPLOYEES P.F. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ applications common questions of law are involved. The principal questions of law which arise for consideration are these: whether in the exercise of powers under section 14B of the Employee's Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and para 32A of the Employee's Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, the court or the Central Provident Fund Commissioner or any other officer authorised by the Central Government by notification in the official gazette can reduce the damages specified in paragraph 32A recoverable for a particular period for delay? If the answer to the question is yes, what are the factors to be considered by the court or the authorities in reducing the damages?

(2.) In these cases the Central Board has approached this court alleging that the appellate tribunal had no power to reduce the damages.

(3.) Now, the question which falls for considerations is whether after introduction of para 32 (A) by amendment made on 16th August, 1991 with effect from 1st September, 1991, the Provident Fund Commissioner or the Tribunal has any power to reduce this rate or amount?