Interim stay of CHA licence revocation barred where it would effectively restore the licence before final disposal.

A stay of an order revoking a CHA licence could not be granted under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, because such relief would in substance restore the licence and amount to allowing the appeal at the interim stage. The Tribunal held that Rule 41 confers only limited powers to make orders necessary to give effect to its orders, prevent abuse of process, or secure the ends of justice. Since it does not authorise interim restoration of a revoked CHA licence, the requested stay was beyond the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether stay of the order revoking the CHA licence could be granted under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that a stay of revocation of CHA licence would have the practical effect of restoring the licence and would be equivalent to allowing the appeal at the interim stage. Rule 41 confers only limited powers to make orders necessary to give effect to the Tribunal's orders, prevent abuse of process, or secure the ends of justice. The provision does not authorise grant of stay against an order revoking a CHA licence, and such relief was held to be beyond the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

Conclusion: Stay could not be granted under Rule 41 in a case of revocation of CHA licence.

---