Statutory arbitration under the Telegraph Act fails where the arbitrator is not appointed by the Central Government.

An award under Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act was unsustainable because the arbitrator had not been appointed by the Central Government, which is a statutory condition for a valid reference in disputes concerning telegraph lines, appliances or apparatus. Since that mandatory appointment requirement was not met, the reference lacked authority and the award was treated as void ab initio. The constitutional challenge to Section 7-B was not decided because the matter was resolved on the appointment defect.

---

---

Issues: Whether the award passed by the arbitrator was sustainable when the arbitrator had not been appointed by the Central Government under Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

Analysis: Section 7-B requires disputes concerning telegraph lines, appliances or apparatus between the telegraph authority and the beneficiary to be referred to arbitration, and the arbitrator must be appointed by the Central Government. The appointment in the present matter was not made by the Central Government. As the statutory condition for a valid reference was not met, the appointment itself was without authority and the award could not stand. The challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 7-B was not decided because the case was resolved on the appointment issue.

Conclusion: The award was set aside as void ab initio and the petitioner succeeded on the ground that the arbitrator was not appointed in accordance with Section 7-B.

---