S.H. KAPADIA, J.:---The above batch of writ petitions involve interpretation of provisions of section 17(2) of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 read with the Employees Provident Funds Scheme, 1952. For the sake of convenience facts in Writ Petition No. 1910 of 1992, briefly, are being stated. At the outset, it may be clarified that all the above writ petitions raise common question of law regarding power and the authority of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to impose the impugned conditions while granting individual exemptions under section 17(2) of the said Act, 1952. It may be clarified that in the above writ petitions we are not required to examine the constitutional validity or the vires of each of the said conditions. Basically the question involved in the group of petitions is the power of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to impose the impugned conditions while granting individual exemptions under section 17(2) of the said Act, 1952 read with the Scheme framed thereunder. With the above clarification, the facts in Writ Petition No. 1910 of 1992 may be seen. The petitioner is a Trade Union recognised under the provis