K.J. Sengupta, J. - (1.) Both the matters are taken up for hearing as the points raised herein are identically same and the same can be disposed of by a common judgment. The facts in both the cases are not disputed much. Both the petitioners previously filed writ petitions contending that there was defect in functioning of the respective electric meters installed at their service installation. While disposing of the writ petitions the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose has been pleased to direct all the disputes to be referred to the Chief Electrical Inspector, West Bengal. The Chief Electrical Inspector thereafter has decided and made awards. The awards apparently have gone in favour of the petitioners. The CESC has preferred two appeals against the aforesaid two awards apparently under Sec. 36(2) of the Indian Electricity Act. 1910. The awards were passed on 13th February 2001 and 19th July 2001 respectively. Appeals were preferred against the aforesaid two orders on 11th June 2001 and 12th September 2001 respectively.
(2.) In the writ petition the short point is that whether the aforesaid two appeals can be entertained by the appellate authority after expiry of limitation period of three months or not.
(3.) Mr. Pratap Chatterjee, learned Senior Advocate submits that the appellate authority cannot entertain any appeal beyond the prescribed period of limitation which in this case is three months. He submits that the appellate authority has no jurisdiction and/or authority to condone delay drawing the principle and/or analogy of Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act. 1963. He submits that the provision of Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act is applicable only in case of Court not even in case of Tribunal formed under a statute. The appellate authority under the aforesaid Act cannot by any stretch of imagination be termed to be a Court so as to apply the provision of Limitation Act 1963.;