1. Shri J. Jeshtmal, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that he has filed copies of the impugned order and of the Order-in-Original with the memorandum of appeal and he had also filed an application for the stay of the recovery of the penalty amount and for waiving its pre-deposit. He states that the Registry has turned down the stay application stating that it should be enclosed with copies of the Order-in-Original in triplicate. He states that copies of the Order-in-Original have already been filed with the memorandum of appeal and it will be a duplication to enclose them again with the stay application. So far as the filing of the additional copy of the order is concerned, we feel that the Registry need not insist on the production of additional copies with the stay application and the copies already filed with the memorandum of appeal would be sufficient to be looked into while deciding the stay application. The stay application may, therefore, be listed for hearing as early as possible.