Pawan Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 21 Sep 2023 · 2023:DHC:6335-DB
Sanjeev Sachdeva; Manoj Jain
W.P.(C) 11622/2023
2023:DHC:6335-DB
procedural other

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed an application to record the presence of the respondents' advocate omitted in the original judgment by issuing a corrigendum.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 11622/2023
PAWAN KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through: None.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rahul Sharma, CGSC for UOI with Mr.Vinod Tiwari, GP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN O R D E R 21.09.2023
CM APPL. 49150/2023
JUDGMENT

1. This is an application on behalf of Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate contending that his presence has not been noted in judgment dated 01.09.2023 though he had appeared for the respondents. The Officer, who was present on that date, confirms that Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate had appeared on the said date.

2. In view of the above, the application is allowed.

3. The presence of Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate shall be read in judgment dated 01.09.2023 as also having appeared for the respondents.

4. This order shall be uploaded as a corrigendum to judgment dated 01.09.2023.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MANOJ JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2023