Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the pending MEIS applications were required to be processed and scrips issued, and how the two applications said to be time barred were to be dealt with.
Issue (i): Whether the pending MEIS applications were required to be processed and scrips issued, and how the two applications said to be time barred were to be dealt with.
Analysis: The order records that 70 applications had already been allowed. For the remaining 39 applications, the respondents stated that they would be processed forthwith and the scrips issued expeditiously. For the two applications treated as barred by limitation, the petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent with the supporting documents so that the claim could be examined and decided.
Conclusion: The 39 pending applications were directed to be allowed and scrips issued. The two disputed applications were left for fresh decision by the competent authority after hearing the petitioner.
Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained immediate relief in respect of the larger balance of applications, while the remaining two applications were kept open for administrative determination on the question of limitation and supporting documents.