Application filed to correct clerical errors in an order dated 06/04/2010 in W.P. No. 6594 of 2005, where 'rejected' was replaced with 'allowed' and respondent name was modified.
Correction of order dated 06/04/2010 to substitute 'allowed' for 'rejected' and correct respondent name.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
\
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.t
G-<
M.C.C. N0. 2-?^fe OF 2010
Sl© (ARISING OUT OFW.P. N0. 6594 OF 2005) ^CRSft
AN APPLICATION FOR MQDIFICATION OF ORDER DATED 06/04/2010 PASSED BY HON'BLE SHRI M.M. SHRIVASTAVA. J, IN W.P. N0. 6594 OF 2005 "BQDHIRAM AND ANOTHER VS. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVILJ^ BILASPUR AND 4 OTHERS"
APPLICANTS (PETITIONERS)
Bodhiram
S/o Late Shri Tokharam
Aged about 43 years,
Hiralal,
S/o Late Shri Tokharam, Aged about 41 years
Both Caste Dheemar, R/o village Janji, Tehsil Seepat,
District Bilaspur (C.G.)
^^
SESPONDENTS 1.
The Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Bilaspur (CG.)
The Additional Collector, Bilaspur (CG.)
District Bilaspur (CG.)
State of Chhattisgarh,
Through - The Secretary, Revenue Department,
Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan,
G.E. Road, Raipur (CG.)
Rajendra Bhosle,
Patwari,
Village Seepat, P.H. N0. 27, Village Janji, Tehsil Seepat,
District Bilaspur (CG.)
^ ^
^:y^^^i^^is^:'^.
XI-HC—78
75E[-^|^|c1<<, (^TftigTI^, ^<«||^<
WTc'ff 5h^ lch'. .^UrG-. .^rp.: ^(J^fe.. .'^T'T 201
o?^/(G
sn^r IWR (^^^tf)
|W^f^Tf^TN)
$h+1|ch|^HW^T^I^|^raf?pfrTmraT^^^<Ri^i?
^<3tf^?TOT^r|
|---|---|---|
|.-ly|B : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Moha
9-09-2014|1 Shrivastava, J.|
||Shrl Sanjay ShyamAgrawal,
Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Adv.
.
Application for correction / m|
[earlier on 06/04/10 has been move
[the order, it has been incorrectly
application for mutation was rejec|
whereas the application was allow^
This factual submission coutj
Therefore, there is a need to modir
Accordingly,it is directed-
In the order dated 06/04/10,
thewords 'rejected', the word 'allo^
In
the
last
para
of the
mentioned
as
'respondent
No.f
'Additional Tahsildar, Seepat'.
I
The MCCis finally disposedj|^ounsel forthe petitioner/s.
|
(.
IfortheState.
bdification of the order passed
[d mainly on the ground that in
(nentioned that the petitioner's
ed by the Additjonal Tahsitdar
d.
j not be disputed by the State.
edshall be substituted.
orderdated 06/04/10.
in the third line of 2ndpara, for
srder, Wherever
it
has
been
,
it
shatl
be
substituted
as
off.|
|Deepti||»-^r-"'|
Bodhiram
Hiralal
The Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Bilaspur
The Additional Collector, Bilaspur
N.T.P.C. Plant, Seepat
State of Chhattisgarh
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
