IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.340 of 2009 Suresh Sharma, son of late Tapas Singh, resident of Village- Guliganj, P.S. Tekari, District- Gaya --- Appellant --- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Patna. 3. The Directorate Provident Fund, Patna. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Gaya. 5. The Accountant General (Bihar) Patna ---- Respondents ---- Opposite Parties. ------------- 4. 3.11.2010 Heard Mr. Siddhartha Prasad for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.2, learned Government Pleader No.15 for opposite party nos. 1 to 4, and Mr. Ranjan Kumar for opposite party no.5. This application has been filed for correction of certain factual errors in the order dated 17.9.2009, passed in L.P.A. No. 1037 of 1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out the following errors have occurred in paragraph 2 of the order dated 17.9.2009: “2. It appears that the petitioner was at the relevant point of time posted as Head-clerk in an office of the State Government. He is alleged to have defalcated a sum of rupees forty-two lacs out of which on detection he refunded an amount in part. The petitioner had thereafter approached this Court by preferring the writ petition with the prayer that the trial has not made any progress, notwithstanding which his pension has not been released. Taking into account the over- all situation, the learned Single Judge allowed 2 the petitioner to avail 50 per cent of his pension which shall abide the result of the criminal case against the petitioner.” (Emphasis added) He submits three typographical errors in the order (i) The petitioner was not Head-clerk at the relevant point of time. He was at the relevant point of time functioning as a clerk. (ii) He is alleged to have defalcated a sum of rupees forty-two lacs, which is not the correct position. The allegation is against others also, and (iii) He has not refunded any amount at all. In that view of the matter, we direct the following corrections in the order dated 17.9.2009: (i) The petitioner was a clerk at the relevant point of time. (ii) He is alleged to have defalcated a sum of rupees forty-two lacs along with others, and (iii) The petitioner has not refunded part of the alleged amount of defalcation. The order dated 17.9.2009, passed in L.P.A. No. 1037 of 1997, accordingly stands modified. This application is accordingly disposed of. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar,J. ) (Shyam Kishore Sharma,J.)