IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1509 of 2008 KISHUN SINGH & ORS Versus MOST. MALTI KUER & ORS ----------- 2 10.09.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court, when the petitioners have a grievance that as a matter of fact the impugned order came to be passed without hearing him on the petition dated 17.5.2008 and that such grievance was only confined against a certificate dated 26.4.1990 treated to be a public document in the order dated 17.5.2008, the interest of justice would require that the petitioner should be heard specifically in this regard. In fact, this Court would itself direct the petitioner to file a fresh application by confining his prayer for review of the order dated 17.5.2008 only to the extent of Ext.3 as the petitioner does not have any grievance as with regard to the finding of the court below in respect of Exhibit-4. That being so, this Court would direct the Court below to reconsider and pass a fresh order only in respect of Ext.3 provided the petitioner would file fresh application disclosing the reasons for its being not taken on record by way of a public document. It is however made clear that this Court had not gone into merits of as with regard to that Ext.3 being a public document. With the aforementioned observations and directions this Civil Revision application is disposed of. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)