AMIN CHAND AND SONS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question which falls for determination is whether this Court can in the exercise of its extraordinary powers under Articles 228 and 227 of the Constitution of India interfere with the discretion vesting in the first respondent, the State of Punjab, to levy damages on an employer under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952, hereinafter, called the Act ?

(2.) THE facts which are not disputable lie within a narrow compass and may briefly be set out. The petitioner-firm of Messrs. Amin Chand and Sons of Phillaur carry on the work of manufacturers of iron chaff cutting machines and during the course of their business have been employing a large number of workers. They have become liable under the provisions of the Act and the Scheme made thereunder (The Employees' Provindent Fund Scheme, 1952) to deduct not only the employees' contribution towards provident fund but also their own. An employer is required under the Act to remit his own contribution to the Provident Fund together with what is called an administrative charge to the "fund" which under Clause (h) of Section 2 of the Act is defined to mean "the provident fund established under the Scheme. " This Fund at the relevant time was under the control of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Punjab, at Ambala, It may be mentioned, though it is not relevant to the case, that the Fund is now at Chandigarh where the Office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner for Punjab and Himachal Pradesh has come to be located.

(3.) UNDER Para. 38 of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, an employer is required