1. In furtherance of order dated 27.9.2012 the respondent Collector has passed order dated 1.10.2012. It prima facie appears that there are certain apparent contradictions in the observations made in the order which are required to be explained by the author of the order.
2. Besides this, it also appears from the order dated 1.10.2012 that though the earlier order passed by first adjudicating authority has been set aside by appellate / revisional authority and the matter is remanded to the first authority however, the order dated 1.10.2012 is passed without taking into consideration the said aspect. So that necessary clarification can be obtained on record, it appears necessary that the author of the order should remain present in the Court and explain the observation made in the order.
3. The order requiring presence of the author is passed because the matter is pending before the authority since long time and though lease has been granted in favour of the petitioner, royalty passes are not issued and consequently the petitioner is not able to carry on excavation activity and concerned authority seems to be taking steps only under Court's order and not in ordinary course of duty.
4. Mr. Yagnik, learned AGP has requested to inform the author of the order dated 1.10.2012 to remain present on 8.10.2012. It would be open to the petitioner to place on record, under affidavit the order dated 1.10.2012 and take appropriate measures, if he so desire in connection with the order dated 1.10.2012 otherwise the respondent will place the order dated 1.10.2012 in the Court.
S.O.
to 8.10.2012.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh*