A tribunal cannot reject an appeal filed within the time expressly permitted by the High Court.

Jai Kisan Wholesale Vegetable Merchants Association’s private market licence was cancelled by the Director of Agricultural Marketing on 15 September 2025.

After the High Court, first in a writ petition and then in a writ appeal, directed the Association to pursue the statutory remedy under Section 72-E of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 (“APMC Act”), the Association filed appeals before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (“Tribunal”) within the ten-day period specified by the Division Bench, together with applications seeking condonation of delay.

The Tribunal rejected the applications and dismissed the appeals as time-barred.

In a subsequent round of writ petitions, the Single Judge set aside those orders, allowed the delay applications and directed the Tribunal to hear the appeals on their merits.

The present writ appeals challenged that decision.

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the statutory appeals as time-barred, notwithstanding Regulation 61(b) of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 1979 and the prior High Court orders permitting the Association to file appeals within ten days.

2. Whether the Single Judge’s order setting aside the Tribunal’s dismissal orders and restoring the appeals was legally sustainable.

Section 72-E(1)(b) of the APMC Act provides for an appeal to the Tribunal within thirty days of receipt of the Director’s order.

Under Section 15 of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976, the Tribunal may make regulations governing its practice and procedure; Section 6(2) addresses a single member’s powers, including admission of an appeal presented after the period allowed by law.

Regulation 61(b) of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 1979 provides that Sections 4, 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 apply mutatis mutandis to all appeals and petitions before the Tribunal.

The Court also treated the earlier Division Bench directions—affirming recourse to the statutory appeal and permitting its filing within ten days—as final between the parties.

The Court held that the dispute was governed by the Tribunal’s procedural framework, including Regulation 61(b), which expressly makes Section 5 of the Limitation Act applicable to appeals before it.

More importantly, the Association had filed its appeals within the ten-day period allowed by the Division Bench, whose directions had become final between the parties.

The Tribunal therefore could not disregard those directions and reject the appeals on limitation grounds.

The Court considered the authorities cited by counsel inapplicable because the earlier High Court orders and the Tribunal Regulations governed the specific circumstances.

It rejected all three appeals, leaving in place the Single Judge’s order setting aside the Tribunal’s dismissal of the delay applications and restoring the statutory appeals for consideration on their merits.