Review petition allowed to correct a typographical error in an earlier order regarding the respondent petitioner's husband's date of retirement from 29.05.2016 to 28.02.2011.
Date of retirement in Paragraph 1 of the order dated 02.02.2023 shall be read as 28.02.2011 in place of 29.05.2016.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
REVP No. 33 of 2023
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate. For State : Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
07/07/2023
2
Sd/-
( Parth Prateem Sahu ) JUDGE
Nisha
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review petition needs to be allowed to correct a typographical error in the date of retirement.
Smt. Ashok Tripathi Wd/o Late Lalta Prasad Tripathi
State Of Chhattisgarh
Parth Prateem Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
