Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Applicants and learned Chief Standing Counsel and perused the record.
(2.) IT has been submitted by Shri Sunil Sharma, the learned Counsel for the Applicant that a Bunch of writ petitions have been decided by this Court by means of order and Judgment dated 24.01.2011 which is under review in this petition, has been passed on the basis of the consent given by the learned Counsel for the parties but he submits that no such consent was given by him, thus, there appears an apparent factual error in the said judgment. It is to be noted that while dictating order in open Court in the Bunch of the writ petitions, suggestions were made by the learned Counsel for the parties for relegating the matter to the State Government as there were contradictions in the orders passed by the appellate authority with regard to the allocation of the sugarcane from the cane centers and also for change of the appellate authority and as such the Chief Secretary of the State of U.P. was directed to allot the work of the appeals arising out of the orders passed by the Cane Commissioners in exercise of the powers under Section 15 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase), Act 1953, Rule 22 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Rules, 1954 and Sub -rule 6(1) (a) of Sugar Cane Control Order, 1966 to any judicial officer working in the Civil Secretariat and accordingly the orders were passed. However, in the instant application, it has been contested that no such consent has been given by the counsel of the Applicant's sugar mill and as such there is an apparent factual error in the judgment. Accordingly I, recall the order and judgment dated 24.01.2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 257 (MS) of 2011. It has been informed at the Bar that the aforesaid order and judgment passed in the Bunch of the writ petitions has been assailed by the State of U.P. in Special Appeal No. 55 of 2011, State of U.P. v. Mawana Sugar Mill Limited and the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.02.2011 as an interim measure has provided that the appeals under the order passed by the learned Single Judge shall not be transferred to L.R./Joint L.R. but the pending appeals before the State Government, which were not the subject matter of any of the writ petitions filed before this Court, shall be decided by the Officers, so newly authorised by the State Government, subject to further orders of the Court.
(3.) THE Division Bench in the special appeal after accepting suggestions of the Appellant namely; Addl. Advocate General Shri Jaideep Narain Mathur that the present officer would not be any more deciding the appeal but authorisation of other incumbent would be made for the purpose and at the moment two officers would be appointed/authorised to decide the appeals, henceforth.;