@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Tapen Sen, J.@mdashThe accident in question occurred on 16.10.1993 and the claimant petition was filed under the provision of Workmen''s
Compensation Act, 1923 some time in the year 1994. Sub-section (3) of Section 4-A of thq Workmen''s Compensation Act, 1923 as it presently
stands was inserted through an amendment in 1995 being effective from 15th September, 1995. Clause (b) of the Sub-section (3), supra, reads
thus ;
4-A(3)(b). If, in his opinion, there is no justification for the delay, direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears and interest
thereon, pay a further sum not exceeding fifty per cent of such amount by way of penalty:
Provided that an order for the payment of penalty shall not be passed under Clause (b) without giving a reasonable opportunity to the employer to
show cause why it should not be passed.
2. First of all there should be a clear finding by the Tribunal with respect to the absence of any reason for the delay and only based on such finding
the Tribunal can direct that the employer shall pay the penalty as stipulated in Sub-section (3). Secondly, the penalty amount is to be paid by the
employer only after a proper show-cause notice has been issued to the employer and he has been afforded a reasonable opportunity of explaining
as to why the penalty be not imposed against him. Both these requirements of law, being mandatory, not having been met in the award under
challenge in this appeal, the part of the award which imposes the penalty is declared to be null and void. It is, accordingly, set aside.
To that extent the appeal is allowed. No order as to costs.
