2025:JHHC:22834 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 991 of 2024 Rajiv Garg, S/o Late Parmanand Garg, R/o Garg Niwas, Lake Avenue, Kanke Road, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.- Gonda, Dist-Ranchi ..... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, P.O., P.S. & District- Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, P.O. P.S. & District Ranchi 4. The Special Officer, Schedule Area Regulation, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi 5. Chunni Munda, S/o Parna Munda, R/o Village- Mathargonda, P.O., P.S. & District-Ranchi 6. Praveer Garg, S/o not known to the petitioner, R/o Garg Niwas, Lake Avenue, Kanke Road, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.- Gonda, Dist-Ranchi … …. Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Ms. Shray Mishra, Advocate Mr. Deepankar, Advocate Mr. Sushant Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Suman Marandi, AC to SC-IV ------ Order No. 02 / Dated : 08.08.2025. 1. The instant civil misc. petition has been filed for correction of certain typographical errors in the order passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 1149 of 2011 with W.P. (C) No. 1214 of 2011 on 11.03.2024. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is factually incorrect as stated in para 3 of the order that Parmanand Garg was the father of both the petitioners. It is further submitted that in para 4 of the order it has been stated that the SAR proceeding was initiated on an application of Parmanand Garg. However, it was initiated on the application of Chunni Munda. These errors do not affect the merit of the case and cannot be said to be typographical. 3. Under the circumstance, this civil misc. petition stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ -