https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188230 Where the governing rule itself fixed a seven-day period for mining lease applications, the notice inviting applications was not invalid merely because it did not repeat that period. The authority was still bound to keep the application window open for the full prescribed period, and could not lawfully grant the lease before that time expired. Preference for earlier or later applications under the relevant rule operated only after valid applications had been received within the statutory period. The notice was therefore valid, but the lease grant was premature and contrary to the Rules. en-us Wed, 09 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Nov 2016 15:35:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188230 Where the governing rule itself fixed a seven-day period for mining lease applications, the notice inviting applications was not invalid merely because it did not repeat that period. The authority was still bound to keep the application window open for the full prescribed period, and could not lawfully grant the lease before that time expired. Preference for earlier or later applications under the relevant rule operated only after valid applications had been received within the statutory period. The notice was therefore valid, but the lease grant was premature and contrary to the Rules. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188230