\^ ^' <v HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CQRAM: Humble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha & Hon'ble Shri Radhe Shvam SharmaJJ. APPLICANT .C.C. N0.826/2011 IVI/s. Unique Builders through: Prop. Raju Mishra, S/o S.P. Mishra, aged about 42 years, Occupation- Contractor, R/o C-113, Shahpura, Bhopal (M.P.). RESPONDENTS 1 VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through: its Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department Bridge Zone, Raipur The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department Bridge Circle, Ralpur (C.G.). The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Bridge Construction Division, Raipur (C.G.). APPIiCATION FOR SUITABLE MODIFICATION IN THE ORDER Appearance: Ms. Hamida Siddique, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the State. SUNiL KUMAR SINHA.J. ORAL ORDER (30.11.2011) HeardonlA.No. 01/2011. I.A. No. 01/2011 has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the M.C.C. On due consideration, I.A. No. 01/2011 is allowed and the detay in filing the M.C.C. is tiereby condoned. 1 M.C.C. N0. 826;2011 Heard on M.C.C. No. 826/201 1. Ms. Siddique, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, submits that the particulars of respondents 2 to 4 have been wrongly mentioned in the cause title of the writ petition (C) No. 5632/2011 and order dated 22.09.2011, therefore, they may be permitted to be suitably corrected. By the order dated 22.09.2011, the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the writ petition in view of clause 28 of the agreement with liberty to approach appropriate authority for redressal of grievances. The State is party number 1 in the writ petition. In light of the above order,where State is also a party there doesn't appear any further necessity impleading new parties because it is not going to make any different in the test of the order passed on 22.09.2011. Wrth the above observation, the M.C.C. is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Sd/- Radhe Shyam Sharma Judge