Birendra Kumar Tirkey And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 6 August, 2015

[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Jharkhand High Court

Birendra Kumar Tirkey And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 6 August, 2015

Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                CMP No. 276 of 2015
                                        ----

1.Birendra Kumar Tirkey

2.Samson Bhengra

3.Pramod Kindo

4.Birendra Manjhi

5.Anil Bhengra

6.Sunil Kumar Sahu

7.Kumar Braj Bhushan Singh

8.Jawahan Swansi

9.Alben Hembrom

10.Damiyanus Toppo

11.Jalendra Oraon ... ... Petitioners

-Versus-

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.The Director, Primary Education, HRD, Ranchi

3.The Deputy Commissioner,Khunti

4.The District Superintendent of Education, Khunti ... ... Respondents

----

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

----

           For the Petitioners        :Mr.A.K.Tiwari
           For the Respondents        :JC to GP I
                                            ----

02- 06.08.2015     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deficit court fee has

already been filed today and rest of the surviving defects shall be removed during course of the day. He is permitted to do so.

Petitioners seek modification of the judgment dated 16.7.2015 passed in WP(S) No.572/2015 as some typographical errors have crept in the second paragraph of the said judgment. It is submitted that instead of 1994 in the first line of the said paragraph it should be 1999 and in the second last line, the year of the acquisition of teachers training would be 2002 instead of 2003.

Counsel for the State does not object to the said prayer. It, however, appears from the pleadings of the writ petition that 11 petitioners herein had joined service in the year 1999 and 2000 and they had completed their training in 2002, as per statements made in para 8 and 13 of the writ petition.

Accordingly, in the second paragraph of the judgment dated 16.7.2015, in the first line instead of the year 1994 it should be read as 1999 and 2000 in individual cases. Similarly, the year of acquisition of training should be read as 2002 instead of 2003 in the same paragraph. The said judgment be read along 2. with the instant order.

This CMP stands disposed of accordingly.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. ) Pandey

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court