One Mr. D.D.Kapadiya, Additional Resi. Dy. Collector, Ahmedabad, has filed affidavit dated 16.10.2012 wherein it is stated, inter alia, that:-
"10. I say that these details will go to show that since, the petitioner was never in the list of "Riot affected persons", as prepared in the year 2002 he did not get any compensation. The petitioner was therefore not granted any compensation.
11. I say that the petitioner was not in any of the lists prepared by office of the District Collector and he was never categorized as the "Riot affected persons" for the purpose of seeking compensation."
2. On the other hand, it is noticed from the record of present petition that on 19.3.2002, a panchnama was drawn and a complaint/FIR was also filed on 19.3.2012 wherein, according to the petitioner, the details regarding damage to the petitioner's property was mentioned and a complain thereabout was recorded in the panchnama.
3. In view of such assertion by the petitioner and in light of the said documents, the deponent of the said affidavit dated 16.10.2012 shall, on or before the next date of hearing, explain the statement made in paragraphs No.10 and 11 of the affidavit dated 16.10.2012 and will also clarify the factual position that when complaint/FIR was filed on 19.3.2002 and panchnama was also drawn on the same date, i.e. 19.3.2012, then, why the petitioner's name did not appear in the list of "Riot affected persons", prepared in the year 2002 by the concerned parties.
S.O. to 29.11.2012.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc