Personal penalty challenge left undecided, so the order was recalled and the appeal restored for fresh disposal.

The final order was recalled to the limited extent necessary because it contained no finding on the appellant's challenge to the personal penalty. That omission was treated as an error requiring correction, as the connected appeal had been disposed of commonly without determining whether the penalty was upheld or set aside. The rectification application was therefore allowed to that extent, and the appeal was restored for fresh disposal on the penalty issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the final order required recall for want of any finding on the challenge to personal penalty, and whether the appeal should be restored for fresh disposal.

Analysis: The order in the connected appeal disposed of the matters commonly, but it did not record any finding as to whether the personal penalty imposed on the applicant had been upheld or set aside. In the absence of any such determination, the omission was treated as an error warranting correction. The appropriate course was to recall the order to the extent necessary and restore the appeal for disposal on the appellant's challenge to the penalty.

Conclusion: The rectification application was allowed to that extent, the earlier order was recalled insofar as it affected the applicant, and the appeal was restored for fresh disposal.

---