AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.A. no.2843 of 2023
Mr. Rath, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicants, who were petitioners in the writ petition, disposed of by order dated 24th February, 2023.
He submits, the application is for modification of order dated 24th February, 2023, by which the writ petition was disposed of. He submits, there had been made amendment application I.A. no.1851 of 2023 to amend the prayer. This was not pointed out, when the writ petition was disposed of. The prayer has been reproduced in paragraph-4 of said order dated 24th February, 2023. Hence, it is necessary to incorporate amendment to the prayer, as being part of said order.
Ms. Pattanayak, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State. Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (BMC). He submits, his name had not been reflected in the cause list. That appears to have been an inadvertent omission since his Vakalatnama is on the file. He submits, that is why the matter was listed on 24th
The application, though said to be for modification, is actually one for amendment. It carries schedule of amendment. There does not appear to be any dispute regarding necessity of the amendment on a misdescription in the prayer of the writ petition. Hence, the application is allowed. There be amendment in terms of the schedule to the application. Petitioner will file consolidated writ petition. Accordingly, the correction deemed to have been incorporated in our order dated 24th February, 2023 under paragraph 4, where prayer in the writ petition stands extracted.
The application is disposed of.
……………………………