The duty of adjudicating authorities to conduct themselves with propriety and ascending divinity, and the importance of dignified language in judgments.

( 1 ) BY order dated 9-4-99 the Presiding Officer Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent No. 2 and remanded the case to the authority under Section 7-A of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-petitioner herein, for redetermination of the provident fund amount to be levied on respondent No. 2, establishment. The said order has been brought on record as Annexure-P-8. It is noticeable that the Tribunal felt that no adequate opportunity was afforded to the respondent No. 2 in course of hearing. That apart, other reasons were ascribed by the Tribunal. Feeling dissatisfied the petitioner preferred a review petition. In review petition no notices were issued and the same was rejected vide order dated 16-8-99.

( 2 ) IN course of hearing, Mr. Satish Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly conceded that he has no grievance to give opportunity of hearing to the respondednt No. 2 but he has serious objection with regard to the comments expressed by the Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund, Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the language used by the Presiding Officer. It is apposite and appropriate to reproduce the relevant portion of the order which reads as under :-"it is necessary for the Central Provident Fund organisation to evolve a procedure for filing a Review and writ Petition against the order of the Tribunal passed in appeal. However, 7a authority should not get un-briddled power to file a review on only ground because the order of the Tribunal is not to his taste. The 7a authority is advised, if he feels that he knows law more and that the Tribunal by its order is damaging the interest of workers, he should go to the High Court and get his ability tested. Copy of this order be sent to the Center Provident Fund Commissioner. The review petition is rejected. One copy be given to the learned standing counsel for the department. "

( 3 ) SUBMISSION of Mr. Sharma is that the Regional Fund Commissioner has deputed an Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner to file a review. A person who is authorised to file a review can file a review. The adjudicating authority is not expected to take exception to this. However, the adjudicating authority has to have respect for the other adjudicating authorities.

( 4 ) THE majesty of law requires mutual respect. It enhances the sanctity and sacrosanctity of law. The citizens look up to the authorities to get decisions in respect of their controversies and if there would be different feeling between the authorities which are not worthy of office it will not only be demeaning the prestige and respect of the office in the gaze of the public at large but ultimately a stage may come where an unethical litigant may take advantage of it. Language of judgment must be in good taste, couched with language which reflects not only the prowess of law but also the dignity of legal system. May be Regional Fund Commissioner was affected by the order passed by the appellate Tribunal and thought it appropriate to seek review of the order but that does not necessarily mean that the Presiding Officer in his turn should give vent to his personal feelings by opining that if 7a authority feels that he knows law more and that the Tribunal by its order is damaging the interest of the workers he should go to High Court and get his ability tested.

( 5 ) AN adjudicating authority is expected to have sublime perception and luminous insight instead of a challenging attitude and fighting proclivity. He should remember that he is performing the divine duty and as spoken by many is the embodiment of silent law. The inherent dignity should have its appropriate manifestation in expression of language which should be the epitome of profound depth. It is imperative that there should not even potential impoliteness in any expression