Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 04 Aug 2022 · 2022:DHC:2895-DB
Rajiv Shakdher; Tara Vitasta Ganju
W.P.(C) 7248/2020
2022:DHC:2895-DB
other other

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner's application to rectify clerical errors in the order dated 21.07.2022 by correcting the names of advocates appearing in the case.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 7248/2020
BHUSHAN POWER AND STEEL LTD THROUGH ITS MONITORING PROFESSIONAL MR MAHENDER KUMAR
KHANDELWAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Udit Jain, Advocate.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF
FINANCE & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr Farman Ali and Mr Taha Yasin, Advocates for respondent no.1/UOI.
Mr Aditya Singla, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr
Suryanshu Priyadarshi, Advocate for respondents no.2 and 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU O R D E R
04.08.2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
CM APPL. 34435/2022
JUDGMENT

1. The above-captioned application has been moved on behalf of the petitioner, concerning the rectification of the order dated 21.07.2022. Prayer made in the application reads as follows: “(a) Rectify the record of appearance as noted in the order to read as "Mr. Kumar Visalaksh, Mr. Udit Jain, Mr. Arihant Tater, and Mr. Ajitesh Dayal Singh, Advocates"; (b) Rectify the other Paragraphs of the Order Dated 21.07.2022 (3, 5.1, 6 and 9) to replace the name of “Mr. Rajat Bose” with “Mr. Kumar Visalaksh” W.P.(C) 7248/2020 2022:DHC:5893-DB-DB

2. Mr Aditya Singla, who appears on behalf of the nonapplicants/respondents, says that he has no objection to the prayer made in the application.

3. Accordingly, prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the application are allowed.

3.1. Thus, the aforementioned paragraphs (i.e., paragraphs 3, 5.1, 6 and 9), referred to in our order dated 21.07.2022 shall stand rectified, to the extent that name appearing therein i.e., Mr Rajat Bose will stand supplanted with the name of advocate Mr Kumar Visalaksh.

3.2. Furthermore, the appearance of the petitioner’s counsel, alongside the title, will stand rectified, in accordance with prayer clause (a) of the captioned application.

4. The application is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TARA VITASTA GANJU, J AUGUST 4, 2022 / tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any