9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Rectification of mistake in the Tribunal's Final Orders Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Rectification of Mistake The applicants filed seven applications seeking rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's Final Orders. The main contention was that their appeals were withdrawn without their consent by their advocate, leading to the need for recalling the withdrawal order or rectifying the mistake apparent from the record. The applicants argued that the withdrawal was mistaken, and they should be allowed to present their case for justice. Analysis: The learned advocate representing the applicants, Shri A.D. Maru, withdrew the appeals without consulting the applicants, citing the belief that the Deputy Commissioner would reconsider the matter based on a previous court decision. The applicants emphasized that the withdrawal was unauthorized and requested the Tribunal to recall the orders for a fair hearing. They relied on legal precedents highlighting the need for correcting errors in orders and ensuring justice for litigants. Issue 2: Opposition to the Prayer The Senior Departmental Representative opposed the applicants' prayer for rectification, stating that the advocate was authorized to withdraw the appeals as per the Vakalatnama issued by the applicants. It was argued that the applicants themselves chose to withdraw the appeals based on the expectation of reconsideration by the department, as indicated in their Special Civil Application filed in the High Court of Gujarat. The representative highlighted the procedural rules governing the Tribunal's powers to recall orders. Analysis: The Senior Departmental Representative contended that the applicants had given explicit authority to their advocate to withdraw the appeals at any stage, as per the Vakalatnama. The representative also pointed out that the applicants' own submissions in the Special Civil Application indicated their understanding and consent to the withdrawal based on the expectation of a favorable reconsideration. Moreover, the representative cited legal precedents and procedural rules to support the argument that there was no mistake apparent from the record justifying the recall of the orders. Final Judgment After considering the submissions from both sides, the Tribunal found merit in the Senior Departmental Representative's arguments. It was established that the withdrawal of the appeals was intentional and based on the applicants' own expectations regarding the reconsideration of their case. The Tribunal noted that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record, as the applicants had not disputed the withdrawal by their advocate. Consequently, the applications for rectification were rejected, and the Tribunal upheld the withdrawal of the appeals. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the arguments presented by both parties regarding the rectification of the Tribunal's Final Orders and provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal reasoning behind the decision.
|
