Maintainability of rectification and error apparent limits defeated a post-disposal application filed by a claimed legal representative.

A rectification application filed after final disposal of the appeal was not maintainable because the applicant failed to establish a clear legal entitlement to act for the deceased appellant. Rule 22 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules was held to apply only to continuation of pending proceedings by a legal representative, not to reopen a concluded matter. The Tribunal also held that the alleged mistakes were either already examined earlier or amounted to fresh grounds beyond rectification, since they did not disclose any error apparent on the record. The application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant had locus standi to maintain the rectification application and whether the grounds raised were within the permissible scope of rectification of mistake.

Analysis: The application was filed after the appeal had already been finally disposed of, and the applicant failed to establish a clear legal entitlement to act for the deceased appellant. Rule 22 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules applies to continuation of pending proceedings by a legal representative and does not support an application after disposal. The Tribunal also found that the grounds raised were either already examined earlier or amounted to fresh grounds not urged in the original appeal, and therefore did not constitute an error apparent on the record.

Conclusion: The applicant had no maintainable locus to pursue the rectification application, and the grounds raised were outside the ambit of rectification of mistake. The application was rejected.

---