Tribunal refuses appeal restoration, citing impermissible review of prior decision. Committee's consideration not persuasive.

The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the application for restoration of appeal, stating that reconsideration based on previously known facts would amount to reviewing the earlier decision, which is impermissible in law. The applicants' argument that the appeal should be restored as the application was under active consideration by the Committee on Dispute was not accepted. The Tribunal emphasized that no new facts had emerged since the previous order and that reconsidering the application on the same grounds was not allowed.

---

---

Issues:
1. Restoration of appeal based on clearance from Committee on Dispute.
2. Consideration of new facts for restoration of appeal.
3. Permissibility of reviewing own order.

Analysis:

1. The applicants sought restoration of their appeal after it was initially dismissed due to lack of clearance from the Committee on Dispute. Despite approaching the Committee for reconsideration, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal with liberty to seek restoration upon obtaining clearance. Subsequently, an application for restoration was filed, which was later dismissed. Another application for restoration was submitted, currently pending.

2. The contention raised was that the appeal should be restored as the application was under active consideration by the Committee on Dispute. Reference was made to a case where coercive steps towards recovery were instructed to be halted pending resolution. The argument emphasized that these crucial facts were not considered during the previous hearing for restoration of appeal.

3. The Tribunal, upon hearing the submissions, noted that no new facts had emerged since the previous order. The facts presented now were already known to the Tribunal during the earlier dismissal of the restoration application. It was highlighted that reconsidering the application based on previously known facts would amount to reviewing the earlier order, which is impermissible in law. Consequently, the application for restoration of appeal was dismissed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the application for restoration of appeal, emphasizing that reconsidering based on previously known facts would constitute a review of the earlier decision, which is legally prohibited.

---