Anirudh Kumar and 75 Others v. Union of India and 2 Others

O R D E R

06.06.2024. [1]

Heard Mr. M. Devananda, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. Donnapriya, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC for the Union of India. [2]

By the present application, the petitioners are praying for correcting typographical mistakes appearing in para Nos. 2,4,5,6,8,9,11,12,13,14,15,16,18 & 19 of the judgement dated 30.04.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C)No.675 of 2022. [3]

It is submitted that the proposed correction of the typographical mistakes will not alter the relief granted. [4]

Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioners ought to file review petition in place of application for correction and there is delay in filing the present application. RAJKUMAR PRIYOJIT SINGH Date: 2024.06.07 16:30:01 +05'30' He has pointed out that in para 5 of the order dated 30.04.2024 correction is not required. [5]

This Court has considered the submissions made at the bar and perused the application along with the copy of the order dated 30.04.2024. It is a settled proposition of law that the principle embodied in CPC is applicable in a writ proceeding and section 152 CPC empowers the Court to make correction of typographical mistake in any order without affecting the merit of the relief granted. [6]

In the present case by correcting the typographical mistakes, the substance of the relief granted by this Court will not be changed and the prayer for correcting the typographical mistakes can be allowed. [7]

Accordingly, Misc. case is allowed by correcting the following typographical mistakes occurred in the judgement and order dated

30.04.2024:

(a) In the 3rd line of para 2, in place of '1999' and 'Operator Radio & Lines('ORL' for short)', it should be read as '2008' and 'Radio Mechanic'.

(b) In the 5th line of para 4, in place of Operator Radio & Lines/Radio Mechanics/Cipher, it should be read as HC(RM).

(c) In the 5th line of para 6, in place of 'Mr. Dinesh KK and Radio Mechanic' it should be read as 'Savendra Singh Chauhan and Operator Radio' and in 6th line in place of 'by this Court', it should be read as 'Gauhati High Court'.

(d) In 5th line of para 8, in place of 'class I and Class II Operators' it should be read as 'Radio Mechanic (RM)'.

(e) In 6th line of para 9, in place of 'Central Military' & 'Police Forces' it should be read as 'Central Para military' and 'Central Armed Police Forces' and in 11th and 21st line of para 9, in place of 'Warrant Officer', it should be read as 'Havildar/Head constable'.

(f) In the 2nd line of para 11, in place of '2008 to 2014', it should be read as '2007 to 2014'.

(g) In the 2nd line of para 12, in place of 'rifleman(RRM), it should be read as Warrant Officer(RM)'.

[8]

In terms of the above direction, the application is disposed of.

JUDGE John Kom

Item No.8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL MC(WP(C))No.328 of 2024 Ref: WP(C)No.675 of 2022 Anirudh Kumar & 75 Ors. …Applicants - Versus- Union of India & 2 Ors. …Respondents BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA