r c (^s' BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR .C.C. No. ^'52- /2010 ^.g-.^^~-c1^ ^'°g;^?5^N Esii'iCi®vS's'sVssv ?..i- V! -;.^'It.''' APPLICANT Petitioner ^^.^^ iw-,y.i--' ^\^i--'~ L?y" '\^ ^lA -^-\ '" ^ .-•9^" •^•^••^"" ..-*'°' Smt. Leela Bai, W/o Ramavtar, D/o Kuber Ram, aged about 48 years, Caste Ahir, Occupation-Agriculture, R/o Village Batwahi, P.S. Ambikapur, Tahsil Lundra, district Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS RESPONDENTS :T Moti, S/o Sadhu, aged about 53 years, ,/y;Q '?te?%,. V^ ^t /^-'s^. r?. /f:i ''':;s*.^.' " ^^^:j" '"'^^ifSVS-S^"'" 2. Basant, S/o Sadhu, aged about 56 years, Both by Caste-Ahir, Occupation Agriculture, R/o Village Batwahi, P.S. Ambikapur, Tahsil Lundra, District Surguja (C.G.) 3. The State of Chhattisgarh, through: the Collector, Sarguja (Ambikapur) 4. Balkeshwar, S/o Moti, Caste yadav, aged about 30 years, R/b Village Batwahi, P.S. Ambikapur, Tahsil Lundra, District Sarguja (C.G.) 5. Shiv Prasad, S/o Ramvriksha, Caste Yadav, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Amal Bhitti, P.S. Lakhanpur, Tehsil Lakhanpur, DistrictSarguja (C.G.) 6. Ramavtar, S/o Sadhu, aged about 60 years, R/o Village BatwaHi, P.S. Ambikapur, Tehsil Lundra, District . Sarguja (C.G.) APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF ORDER DATED 05.01.20Q9, PASSED IN M.C.C. N0. 413/2008 (SMT. LEELA BAI • VS. MOTI AND OTHERS) \c- APPLICANT/ PETITIONER HIGH COURT OFCMHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M.C.C. N0.652 OF2010 Smt. Leela Bai NON-APPLICANT RESPONDENTS Versus Moti & Others rApplication for modificatio^LoIorder^lated 05-01-2009 passed in M.C.C. No. 413 of 2008 (Smt. Leela Bai v. Moti and Othersl S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aanihotrj^J, Present:- Shri A.K. Prasad, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.V. Sridhar, Panel Lawyer for the State. O'RDER (ORAU (Passed on this 23rd day of November, 2010) 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant herein preferred a writ petition being W.P.No.2389 of 2004 (Smt. Leela Bai v. Moti and Others}. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27-11-2008 for want of prosecution. Thereafter, the applicant filed an application (M.C.C. No.413 of 2008) for restoration of writ petition No.2389 of 2004. The said application was allowed by this Court vide order dated 5-1-2009 and the writ petition was restored to its original number, subject to payment of cost of? 500/- by the applicant to the High Court Legal Aid Committee. The costwas deposited on 15-01-2009. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that in the order dated 5-1-2009 passed in M.C.C. No.413 of 2008 instead of restoration of W.P.No.2389 of 2004 it has wrongly been typed out as W.P.No.2389 of 2007. Learned counsel prays that the same may be cdrrected. 3. No objection from other side. 4. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the application is ordered, as prayed for. Accordingly, in the order dated 5-1-2009 passed in M.C.C. No.413 of 2008 instead of W.P.No.2389 of 2007, it shall be read as W.P.No.2389of2004. 5. The remaining part of the order dated 5-1-2009 shall remain unaltered. 6. In the result, the present M.C.C. No.652 of 2010 stands disposed of. Gowri Satish K. Agnihotri Judge