Correcting of typographical and grammatical errors in a previously signed judgment to ensure accuracy and publish a certified copy of the corrected order.
Corrected the judgment for printing/typographical errors and directed issuance of certified copies of corrections.
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 PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11788 of 2006
| =================== The Bihar Engineering Ser |
=================================== vices |
|---|---|
| .... .... Petitioner/s Versus |
|
| The State of Bihar & Ors =================== |
.... .... Respondent/s ================================== |
Appearance : |
|
| For the Petitioner/s : For the State : For the Respondent nos. 9 to 35 : |
Mr. Ram Naresh Shukla Mr. Praveen Kumar Mr. Lalit Kishore, A.A.G.-1 Mr.Piyush Lall, A.C. to A.A.G.-1 Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr.Adv. Mr. Akashdeep |
| For B.P.S.C. : |
Mr. Sanjay Pandey,Adv. |
| =================== CORAM: HONOURABL SINGH |
================================== E MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD |
| ORAL ORDER |
19 12-02-2013 This case was finally heard and disposed of by judgment and order dated 5.12.2012. It has been brought under the heading “ To Be Mentioned ” for correction of some grammatical/ typographical mistakes.
Learned counsel for all the parties including the State are present.
The first mistake pointed out is that the judgment is not paginated. Unfortunately, the judgment having been signed and having duly uploaded in the website of the High Court, the same cannot be now altered/corrected. The same is the problem with regard to paragraphs which cannot now be altered/corrected. I have noticed this because in view of nature of corrections sought
Patna High Court CWJC No.11788 of 2006 (19) dt.12-02-2013
2
for which are inadvertent mistakes it would have been convenient if the judgment would have been paragraphed and paginated.
If the judgment is paginated it would round into 34 pages and if it is paragraphed there would be 54 paragraphs to the end. For convenience of every body, the judgment being long and corrections required at various places, the corrections sought for and the corrections as being ordered are given in a tabular form with page numbers corresponding to page in the judgment and paragraph number that would correspond to paragraph if they were so done.
As noted above, it would be clear from the nature of corrections they are printing/ typographical error and are needed to be made in the interest of justice. All parties agree.
| Sl. No |
Page | Para | Line para |
of |
What is sought to be corrected |
what is to be replaced on **correction ** |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3 | Cause title |
- |
For Respondent Nos. 9 to 34. |
For Respondent Nos. 9 to 35. |
|
| 2 | 4 | 5 | 5th botto |
from m |
respondent nos. 9 to 39 |
respondent nos. 9 to 34. |
| 3 | 7 | 11 | 3rd top |
from |
given the Diploma | given to the Diploma |
| 4 | 7 | 12 | 4th top |
from |
02.07.2006 | 22.07.2006 |
| 5 | 10 | 17 | 4thli quot |
ne of ation |
Engineering College of is |
Engineering College or is |
| 6 | 14 | 26 | 12th top |
from | it was superseded | it has superseded |
| 7 | 19 | 34 | 1stli thep |
ne of age |
any action the | any action of the |
| 8 | 19 | 34 | 12th from |
line top |
Diploma | Degree |
| 9 | 19 | 34 | 15th from |
line top |
holder could not even |
holder could not be even |
| 10 | 20 | 35 | 3rd line top |
& 4th from |
unless the Diploma holder wasgraduate |
unless the Diploma was academically equivalent tograduate |
Patna High Court CWJC No.11788 of 2006 (19) dt.12-02-2013
3
| 11 | 20 | 36 | 5th fro bott |
line m om |
complete U-turn that was |
complete U-turn to what was |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 21 | 37 | 6th top |
from | Thomson College, Roorke (now I.I.T, Roorke) granted Diploma even that the syllabus, course of study and duration were because of this “Diploma” was added while enactingthe Rule. |
Thomson College, Roorke (now I.I.T., Roorke) granted Diploma and even for that the syllabus, course of study and duration were equivalent to 4 years degree course and it was because of this ”Diploma” was added while enactingthe Rules. |
| 13 | 21 | 37 | last |
line |
appointment | promotion |
| 14 | 32 | 50 | 3rd top |
from | that one read Rules-4,8 and 10(c) together which would show |
that if one reads Rule-4,8 and 10(c) together it would show |
| 15 | 32 | 50 | 7th top |
from | repealed | repelled |
| 16 | 32 | 51 | 1stl |
ine |
this has accepted by |
this has not been accepted by |
| 17 | 32 | 51 | 4th top |
from |
Rule 8 is not Part IV |
Rule 8 is not in Part V |
| 18 | 33 | 51 | 6th top |
from | rather than helped | rather than it helped |
| 19 | 33 | 52 | 4th bott |
from om |
Class-1 Service and |
Class-1 Service unless |
| 20 | 33 | 52 | 2nd bott |
from om |
Engineers, India are toget |
Engineers, India to get |
| 21 | 34 | 53 | 7th top |
from | amendment and the amendment |
amendment until the amendment |
Let the judgment be read with the aforesaid corrections. Any party, who has taken certified copy of the judgment can apply and get a copy of this order indicating corrections, at the cost of Court, duly certified in that regard and Journal which have published the judgment may issue corrigendum in that regards.
(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)
Patna High Court CWJC No.11788 of 2006 (19) dt.12-02-2013
4
singh/-
The Bihar Engineering Services
The State of Bihar
Navaniti Prasad Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
