Appeal from tribunal order after repeal-and-saving clause lies under the successor enactment's appellate provision.

An appeal transferred from a dissolved appellate board to the tribunal under a repeal-and-saving clause remained an appeal from an order of the tribunal, so the further appeal lay under the appellate provision of the successor enactment. The saving clause preserved the substantive rights and liabilities arising from the original dispute under the repealed law, but it did not alter the proper appellate forum. The appeal was therefore correctly treated as maintainable under the later enactment's appeal provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal lay to the High Court against the order of the Appellate Tribunal, and under which statutory provision such appeal was maintainable.

Analysis: The earlier appellate forum under the repealed enactment stood dissolved, and pending appeals were transferred to the Appellate Tribunal under the saving provision. The order under challenge was therefore an order of the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the later enactment, not an order of the dissolved Appellate Board. The provision governing appeals to the High Court under the later enactment was the corresponding appellate provision applicable to orders of the Appellate Tribunal. The rights and liabilities arising from the impugned order were still to be tested by reference to the repealed law by virtue of the saving clause and the general rule on repeal, but that did not affect the forum of appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal was maintainable under the appellate provision of the later enactment and was rightly to be treated as filed under that provision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an appeal pending before the old appellate board is transferred to the tribunal under a repeal-and-saving clause, a further appeal against the tribunal's order lies under the appellate provision of the successor enactment, while the merits of the original controversy remain governed by the repealed law saved by the statute.

---