IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1368 of 1999 BIPIN KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 8. 2.9.08 Ritesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Ansuman Singh learned junior counsel to Additional Advocate General No.3 for respondent nos. 1 to 5, and Mr. Sidheshwari Prasad Singh for respondent no.6, are present. This has come up under the heading “To Be Mentioned” at the instance of respondent no.6. It is submitted that the present Letters Patent Appeal was disposed of by judgment dated 1.2.2008, and the appeal was dismissed. The last sentence of the judgment inadvertently describes the appeal as writ petition and states that “The writ petition is dismissed”. The error in the last sentence of the judgment is evident and is attributable to typographical error. The result of the appeal should have been indicated in the last sentence of the judgment. Learned counsel for the 2 appellant and respondent nos. 1 to 5 have no objection to the same. In that view of the matter, the oral prayer of respondent no.6 is hereby allowed. The sentence “ The writ petition is dismissed” occurring towards the end of the judgment is substituted by the sentence “ The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed”. ( S. K. Katriar, J.) ( Kishore K. Mandal,J.) Vinay/