Rectification confined to patent mistakes apparent from the record; a change of opinion cannot replace an earlier view.

Rectification powers under section 21-A are limited to correcting a mistake apparent from the record, meaning a patent error that does not require elaborate argument. A mere change of opinion by a later Presiding Officer, substituting a fresh view for an earlier conclusion, is not a valid basis for rectification. Because no apparent error was shown on the facts stated, the rectification order was held to be without jurisdiction and was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification order could be sustained when no mistake apparent from the record was shown and the Tribunal had substituted its own view for that of its predecessor.

Analysis: Rectification under section 21-A is confined to correction of a mistake apparent from the record, that is, an error which is patent and does not require elaborate argument to establish. On the facts found, no such apparent error was demonstrated. The impugned order merely reflected a different view taken by the Presiding Officer from that taken earlier, which amounted only to a change of opinion. Such substitution of one view for another does not satisfy the statutory precondition for invoking rectification powers.

Conclusion: The rectification order was without jurisdiction and was quashed in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification powers can be exercised only to correct a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to replace an earlier conclusion by a fresh opinion on the merits.

---