A. K. Ganguly and J JJ.

1. A somewhat interesting question of law has been raised in this case which falls for consideration before this Court. Such question, arise out of the following facts of the case.

2. The petitioners are admittedly owners of the premises being holding no.384 situated in C. S. Plot Nos.829, 830 and 831 in Ward No.12 mohalla-Pakari, Arrah Town, P. D. Nawadah, Arrah District-Bhojpur (hereinafter referred to as the said premises ). In the year, 1970 the said premises was let out to the District commandant Home Guards Arrah (respondent No.3) at a monthly rental of Rs.300/-. Considering the rent to be rather low, on 22nd january, 1987 petitioner No.1 wrote a letter to respondent No.3 requesting him to enhance the rent of the said premises in accordance with the provisions of Bihar Buildings (Lease, rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ). On receipt of the said letter, respondent No.3 the tenant in his turn, wrote a letter dated 23rd february, 1987 to the respondent No.6, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Arrah requesting him to fix the fair rent of the said premises. As nothing happened, respondent No.3, the tenant, further wrote a letter dated 3rd april, 1987 to respondent No.6 for fixation of fair rent of the said premises. Thereafter, on the basis of those letters respondent No.6 initiated a proceeding being Case No.6 of 1987 under Sec.5 of the said Act for fixation of the fair rents of the said premises. In that proceeding the fair rent of the said premises was fixed at Rs.2,000/- per month by an order dated 20th november, 1987.

3. Section 24 of the said Act provides for appeal against such orders. Sec.24 of the said Act is set out below:

24. Appeal- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order passed by the Controller may, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of such order by him, prefer an appeal in writing to the appellate authority: - (2) On such appeal being preferred, the appellate authority, may- (a) after perusing the memorandum of appeal and hearing the appellant, if necessary, summarily dismiss the appeal, or (b) call for the records of the case from the Controller and after examining such records and, if necessary, making such further enquiry as he thinks fit decide the appeal. (3) Subject to the provision of Sections 26 the decision of the appellate authority and subject only to such decision where an appeal lies, an order of the controller shall be final, and shall not be liable to be questioned in any Court of law whether in suit or other proceeding by way of appeal or revision.

4. From a perusal of the said section it appears that the appeal has to be filed within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the order against which such appeal has to be filed. In this case much after fifteen days, almost after more than two years, an appeal being appeal no.4 of 1990-91 was filed before the Collector, Bhojpur at arrah. It is the positive case of the petitioner that the said appeal was filed without any application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

5. Be that as it may, the appellate authority, without admitting the same, dismissed it at the admission stage by an order dated 20th July, 1992. The said appeal was dismissed inter alia on the ground that the initial order for fixation or rent was passed with the consent of the tenant. Against the said order of dismissal of appeal, a revisional proceeding was initiated under section 26 of the said Act before the commissioner. Sec.26 of the said act is set out below:

"26. Power of revision of Commissioner.-Subject to such rules as may be prescribed and reasons to be recorded in writing, the Commissioner may, either of his own motion or an application made to him in this behalf, revise any order passed by the Controller or by the appellate authority on appeal under this Act. "

6. In the rules framed under the said Act, it is made clear that such revisional application c