Rectification of mistake is limited to obvious record errors and cannot be used to reopen concluded merits or facts.

Rectification jurisdiction is confined to obvious mistakes apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen a concluded decision, reargue the appeal, or seek reappraisal of facts and evidence. An application raising alleged omissions, calculation errors, or new points outside the appeal memorandum will not qualify where it requires long-drawn reasoning or turns on debatable questions of law or fact. The Tribunal treated the request as an attempt to secure rehearing and rejected it, leaving the earlier final order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application for rectification disclosed any mistake apparent from the record so as to justify recall of the earlier final order and fresh hearing.

Analysis: The application sought reconsideration of the earlier decision by raising factual omissions, alleged calculation errors, and additional points that had not been taken in the appeal memorandum. The Tribunal held that rectification is confined to obvious mistakes apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to re-argue the appeal or seek reappraisal of evidence and facts. A point requiring long-drawn reasoning or involving debatable questions of law or fact does not constitute a rectifiable mistake. The request was found to be, in substance, an attempt to secure a rehearing of the appeal.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent from the record was shown, and the application for rectification was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The earlier final order remained undisturbed, and the rectification jurisdiction was held not to extend to reconsideration of the merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification of mistake is limited to obvious errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be invoked to reopen a concluded decision on debatable issues or for reappraisal of facts.

---