Dr.Anil Sukhdevrao Dhage Nagpur v. State Of Mah. Mumbai And 3 Others.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY:

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Civil Application No. 2486 of 2015 IN Writ Petition Nos.1250 of 2002 [decided] [Dr. Anil Sukhadeo Dhage Vs. State of Mah. & others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Jawade, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 3, and 6 and 7. ----

CORAM

:

A. B. CHAUDHARI AND P.N. DESHMUKH, jJ.

DATE :

04th March, 2016 Counsel for the petitioner was absent on the last date, so also today, he is absent. Learned AGP appears for the concerned respondents.

We have gone through the application filed by the petitioner carefully, so also the judgment in respect of which he claims a small correction. It is, therefore, not necessary to adjourn the matter in the absence of the counsel for the petitioner or due to the request made by learned AGP to adjourn the matter for two weeks.

This Court at the end of para 18 in the body of the Judgment ultimately held thus:-

"18.

............................................................ ............We, thus, hold and declare that the petitioner is entitled to continuity of service from 15.10.1996 till 01.09.2015 and the respondents are directed to issue an order of continuity of service accordingly to him.

....."

However, in the operative order, the aforesaid part has not been mentioned. We think, that is a mistake. Hence, we make the following order:-

O R D E R

Add the following after Operative Part "(iv)" as "(v)":- "(v) Respondents are directed to grant continuity of service from 15th October, 1996 till 01st September, 2015 by issuing the order of continuity of service accordingly."

Judgment be modified accordingly.

Civil Application is disposed of.

Judge Judge |hedau|