Rectification for apparent error fails where no grounds of appeal or statement of facts were filed and binding appeal requirements control.

Rectification was declined because no mistake apparent on the face of the record was shown in the Tribunal's earlier order. The applicant argued that the appeal had been filed in time and that the grounds of appeal and statement of facts could be filed later, with the necessary facts already reflected in the impugned order. The Tribunal found that no grounds of appeal or statement of facts had in fact been filed by the date of disposal, and it relied on binding authority requiring a proper appeal. The interlocutory order cited by the applicant was treated as non-precedential, so rectification was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether there was any mistake apparent on the face of the record warranting rectification of the Tribunal's earlier order.

Analysis: The request for rectification was founded on the plea that the appeal had been filed within time, that the grounds of appeal and statement of facts were to be filed later, and that the facts were already reflected in the impugned order. The Tribunal found that no grounds of appeal or statement of facts had in fact been furnished up to the date of disposal, and that the earlier order had relied on the requirement of a proper appeal as explained in binding authority. The interlocutory order cited by the applicant was held not to be a precedent. In these circumstances, no apparent mistake in the earlier order was shown.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent on the face of the record was established, and rectification was not warranted.

---