Milind Saxena And 15 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 26236 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185663
 
Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9279 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Milind Saxena And 15 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya,Sr. Advocate
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dhananjay Awasthi,Rajan Upadhyay
 

 
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

Order on Civil Misc. Correction Application No.2 of 2023.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This is an application seeking correction in my detailed order dated 28.08.2023, by which, the present writ petition alongwith connected writ petitions was allowed.

3. Shri Ramesh Upadhyay, learned Senior Counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph 22 of the judgment with reference to paragraph nos.2 and 3 of the correction application and has argued that it has been inadvertently mentioned in the order of this Court that it was fairly submitted by Shri Ramesh Upadhyay that inquiry has been conducted against officials and staff of the University but, till today, no inquiry has been conducted against the petitioners, whereas, as per the record of the writ petition and 'paragraph 3' of the correction application, inquiries were admittedly held against the students/petitioners, therefore, the said error be corrected.

4. Prima facie, I find that the prayer made in the correction application is infact in the nature of review/clarification of my order in relation to 'paragraph 22' of the order, however, the said paragraph was written and mentioned in relation to the inquiry to hold the petitioners guilty of forging provisional letters and for no other purpose, inasmuch as, in other parts of the judgment, it has been elaborately recorded that certain notices were issued by the University to the students, they had appeared before the University and also produced certain documents.

5. In view of the above, in paragraph 22 of the judgment of this Court, words "no inquiry has been conducted against the petitioners" have to be read in relation to holding the provisional seat allotment letters as forged by the petitioners and not for any other purpose and the statement of Shri Ramesh Upadhayay, learned Senior Counsel recorded in the said paragraph has to be read and understood as such.

6. The correction application is, accordingly, disposed off.

Order Date :- 25.9.2023

Jyotsana