Appellate maintainability must be decided by the appellate forum, not by the authority whose order is challenged.

Once an appeal is lodged before the appellate forum, questions of maintainability, limitation and admission on merits lie with that forum alone. The authority whose order is under challenge cannot unilaterally declare the appeal incompetent or treat its own order as final, and reliance on a view taken in another matter does not confer that power. The Deputy Director therefore lacked authority to reject the appeal as not maintainable, and the impugned communication was liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Deputy Director could declare the appeal incompetent and proceed on the basis that no appeal lay against the adjudication order, despite the appeal having been lodged before the Appellate Board.

Analysis: Once an appeal is presented to the appellate forum, it is for that forum to decide whether the appeal is competent, whether it is within limitation, and whether it deserves to be entertained on merits. The authority whose order is under challenge cannot usurp that function by unilaterally ruling that the appeal is not maintainable and by treating its own order as final. A view taken in some other matter cannot justify such action by the original authority.

Conclusion: The Deputy Director had no authority to reject the appeal as incompetent or to proceed on that basis; the impugned communication was liable to be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: The question of maintainability and limitation of an appeal lies with the appellate authority, not with the authority whose order is challenged.

---