K.Kumar v. The Tamil Nadu State Level Scrutiny Committee

(Through Video Conferencing) R.MAHADEVAN, J.

and S.ANANTHI, J.

Today, the matter is listed under the caption for "being mentioned" at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petition, vide order dated 05.05.2022, in which, the caste of the petitioner was wrongly mentioned as "Kurichchan" instead of "Kurumans", due to typographical error. Hence, the learned counsel sought to rectify the said mistake crept-in, in the order.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has no objection for rectifying the said mistake. However, he prayed for extension of time for complying with the direction issued by this court in the said order.

4. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the records, this court is inclined to rectify the mistake crept-in in the order. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to correct the mistake with regard to the caste of the petitioner as "Kurumans", wherever it was wrongly typed as "Kurichchan" in the order dated 05.05.2022 passed in W.P.No.12086 of 2022. It is needless to state Page No. 1/3

that the direction issued to the respondents 1 and 2, for completing the enquiry and pass orders, shall be complied with, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Except the same, the order remains unaltered.

5. Registry is directed to issue a fresh order copy to all the parties. [R.M.D., J.] [S.A.I., J.] 18.07.2022 r n s R.MAHADEVAN, J.

and Page No. 2/3

S.ANANTHI, J.

r n s 18.07.2022 Page No. 3/3