The Tribunal has the power to condone the delay in presentation of a time-barred application under Section 83(2) of the Wakf Act, 1995. Applicability and/or operation of Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not excluded either by express reference or by necessary implication.

1. THE Board of Wakfs, the opposite party No.2, adopted a certain resolution dated February 10, 2010. It was confirmed in its subsequent meeting dated February 25, 2010. According to the petitioners, they had no knowledge of such resolutions till June 11, 2010. An application for certified copy of the resolutions dated February 10, 2010 and February 25, 2010 was made on June 14, 2010. THE certified copies of the resolutions were furnished to the petitioners on June 22, 2010.

2. THE petitioners felt aggrieved by the said resolutions and wished to challenge the same before the Tribunal constituted under section 83(1) of the Wakf Act, 1995 (hereafter the Act). They, accordingly, applied before the Tribunal under sub-section (2) of section 83 thereof. Sub-section (2) prescribes that an application thereunder is to be made within the time specified in the Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed. 'Prescribed' in terms of section 2(1) of the Act, except in Chapter III thereof, would mean prescribed by rules made by the State Government. THE West Bengal Wakf Rules, 2001, framed by the State Government in terms of section 190 of the Act provides in Rule 26 as follows:

"26. Time limit for moving an application before the Tribunal against any order made under any provision of the Act or any rules made thereunder - Any, mutawalli Or other person interested in a wakf or aggrieved by an order made under the Act or the rules made thereunder, may make an application under sub-section (2) of section 83 to the tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf, within 30 days of such order unless otherwise expressly specified in the Act or the rules made thereunder."

3. SINCE 30 days had lapsed even from the date of the confirming resolution dated February 25, 2010, the petitioners filed an application under Section 95 of the Act before the Tribunal seeking condonation of delay in presentation of the application under section 83(2) thereof. Section 95 of the Act confers power on the appellate authority to entertain an appeal after expiry of the specified period, provided it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period so specified.

4. THE Presiding Officer of the Tribunal considered the application under Section 95 of the Act filed by the petitioners and by order dated November 8, 2011 rejected it on the ground that the period of 30 days for preferring an application under section 83(2) of the Act has to be counted from the date of the order and not from the date of derivation of knowledge of such order. He was further of the view that Section 95 of the Act would have application in respect of appeals that may be preferred under the Act and not to applications, which may be filed before the Tribunal under section 83(2).

5. THE order dated November 8, 2011 is the subject matter of challenge in the present revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution.

6. MR. Munshi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, contended that even though section 95 of the Act may not have application in the present case so as to confer jurisdiction on the Presiding Officer to entertain the application under section 83(2) of the Act upon condonation of delay in its presentation, section 29(2) of the Limitation Act ought to have been considered for the purpose of a decision as to whether the delay could be condoned applying section 5 thereof or not, According to him, the Act is a special law on the subject of wakf and it does not expressly exclude the application of section 5 of the Limitation Act to applications filed under section 83(2) of the Act and. therefore, an order ought to have followed allowing the petitioners to correct the caption of the application seeking condonation of delay by describing it as one filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act.

7. IN support of his submissions