Rectification for mistake apparent on the record: unconsidered Rule 5 plea led to recall and rehearing on merits.

A final order dismissing the appeal was recalled because a material plea on the non-applicability of Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 had not been considered. The appeal grounds had specifically challenged the annual capacity determination on that basis, but the impugned order dealt instead with the nature of the furnace, a point not raised in the appeal. That non-consideration of a relevant contention amounted to a mistake apparent on the face of the record, justifying rectification. The appeal was directed to be reheard on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the final order dismissing the appeal was liable to be recalled on the ground that the specific plea regarding non-applicability of Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 had not been considered and the mistake was apparent on the face of the record.

Analysis: The application for rectification was examined on the basis that the grounds of appeal had specifically challenged the determination of annual capacity by invoking Rule 5, yet that plea was not dealt with in the impugned order. The dismissal had proceeded on a ground relating to the nature of the furnace, although that point was not raised in the appeal. Such non-consideration of a material plea constituted an apparent mistake in the order warranting correction by recall.

Conclusion: The mistake apparent on the face of the record was established, and the final order was recalled with the appeal directed to be reheard on merits.

---