Fresh consideration of stay and waiver required where confiscation, limitation, sick industrial status, and pre-deposit objections were not fully examined.

The writ court found that the Tribunal's pre-deposit and interim protection order had not properly addressed material grounds raised in the stay and waiver application, including the legality of the confiscation order, the quantum of fine, the petitioner's sick industrial status, protection under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the limitation objection. Because those pleaded issues went to the merits of the request for relief, the Tribunal was expected to examine the application afresh and decide each point on its merits. Fresh consideration of the stay and waiver plea was therefore directed within the time fixed by the Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was required to reconsider the stay and waiver application after dealing with the petitioner's plea that the confiscation order, the fine, the financial hardship, the bar under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the plea of limitation had not been properly addressed.

Analysis: The writ court found that the application placed before the Tribunal raised material grounds touching the legality of the confiscation order, the quantum of fine, the petitioner's sick industrial status, the claimed protection under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the limitation objection. Those points had not been duly considered when the Tribunal directed pre-deposit and declined interim protection. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was expected to examine the application afresh and decide the pleaded points on their merits.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was directed to reconsider the application dated 26-2-1996 and pass a fresh order on stay and waiver within the time fixed by the Court.

---