IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.Rev. No. 30 of 2010 Decided on: 1.6.2011 Dharam Chand …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No For the petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : C.M.P.(M) No. 282 of 2010 Heard. In view of the grounds taken in the application, duly supported by an affidavit, the delay in filing the present review petition is condoned. The application stands disposed of. C. Rev. No. 30 of 2010 We have gone through the Annexure P-2 annexed with CWP No. 2874 of 2008. A bare perusal of the same makes it abundantly clear that there is overwriting as far as the number of 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?No -2- days are concerned in the year 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2002. The Court has taken the number of days from the reply filed by the respondent-State to which no rejoinder was filed by the petitioner. 2. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is no error apparent on the face of record and as such the present petition does not fall within the ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC. Consequently, the same is dismissed. No costs. (R.B. Misra), Judge. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. June 1, 2011 (K. Attri)