IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY , THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 10TH JAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 7310 of 2011(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ADIL.M.FAIZAL, AGED 17, S/O.MUHAMMED RUMLY V.S., VELLATHOTTAM, ERATTUPETTA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REP. BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GURDIAN, MUHAMMED RUMLY V.S. S/O.SAITHU MUHAMMED. BY ADV. MR. PRAVEEN K. JOY MR. ADEEP ANWAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, CBSE, SHIKSHA SADAN, 17, ROUSE AVENUE, NEW DELHI - 110002. 2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, J BLOCK, ANNANAGAR WEST, CHENNAI - 600040. BY STANDING COUNSEL MR. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I.A. No. 6228 Of 2011 And W.P (C) No. 7310 Of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 30th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT After disposal of the case vide judgment dated 9th March, 2011, the petitioner has filed this I.A. 6228 of 2011 with the following prayer : “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to correct the mistakes occurred in the judgment dated 09.03.2011 in W.P.(C) No. 7310 of 2011, in para 2 line 3 of the judgment, instead of 'V.S. Mohammed Rumly', as 'V.S. Faizel' and in para 2 line 7 of the judgment instead of 'Hazeena Faizal' as 'Haseena Faizel', in the interest of justice”. 2. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no mistake in paragraph 2 of the judgment, which exactly has reproduced the averments raised in 'first paragraph' and 'synopsis' of the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mistake was occurred at the hands of the counsel while drafting the writ petition, more so, when there was another writ petition filed by the brother of the writ petitioner as W.P (C) No. 6779 of 2011. The mistake is stated as regretted. W.P. (C) No. 7310 of 2011 : 2 : 3. Taking note of the particular facts and circumstances, this Court does not want to cause any prejudice to the petitioner, for the 'mistake of the counsel' for the petitioner. Accordingly, the judgment dated 09.03.2011 in W.P.(C) 7310 of 2011 is recalled and the writ petition is heard afresh. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a proper writ petition, permission is granted and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the rights and liberties as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd