Expired travel permission request fails where the underlying work period had already lapsed, though a fresh application remains possible.

The purchase order was interpreted as showing that the parallel run period operated concurrently with the ERP implementation period, not as a separate consecutive term. The appellant's own pleading treated the purchase order as lasting 13 months, and the Tribunal found that the basis for seeking permission to travel abroad had expired with that work period. The appeal could not be used to revive a stale request for relief after the relevant period had lapsed, although a fresh application could still be made if later circumstances justified travel abroad. On that basis, the claimed permission was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to permission to travel abroad on the basis of the purchase order relied upon, and whether the appeal could still grant such relief when the period sought in the application had already expired.

Analysis: The appeal was examined in the light of the purchase order and the dates for which travel permission had originally been sought. The purchase order described the work period as 13 months plus six months, but the Tribunal read the document as showing that the parallel run period was to operate concurrently with the principal ERP implementation period, not as a separate consecutive period. The appellant's own pleading also referred to the purchase order as having a duration of 13 months. The Tribunal held that the basis for seeking travel permission had lapsed with the expiry of the work period and that the appeal could not be used to revive a stale request, though a fresh application could be made if later circumstances justified travel abroad.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to the claimed travel permission on the basis of the expired purchase order, and the appeal did not merit grant of the relief sought.

---