1 2025:CGHC:49306 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 985 of 2025 1 - Nodal Officer District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited Pendra, District- Gaurela Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) (Respondent No.6) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Balram Singh Thakur S/o Shri Mahendra Singh Thakur Aged About 49 Years Occupation- In-Charge Society Manager, Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti, Medhuka, Registration No. 680, R/o Village- Medhuka, Tahsil- Gaurela, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) (Petitioner) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Co-Operative Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Managing Director Marketing Federation Chhattisgarh, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - District Marketing Officer Gaurela District-Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) 5 - Collector Gaurela District-Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) 6 - Asstt. Commissioner/ Asstt. Registrar Co-Operative Society Gaurela, District-Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 For Respondents No.3 & 4 For State : : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. G. A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 25.09.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the applicant seeking correction of the order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1764 of 2025 and other connected matters, wherein the name of Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate has been incorrectly mentioned in the column of petitioner instead of Respondent No. 6. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that at the time of the final hearing, Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate, appeared on behalf of Respondent No. 6, as is evident from the vakalatnama filed along with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1764 of 2025. However, due to a typographical error, the final order/judgment incorrectly records him as the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. In view of the above, it is prayed that the said order may be corrected to reflect Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey as the counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 6. 3. No objection raised from the other side. 4. Upon perusal of the record and hearing learned counsel for the applicant, it is evident that the said error is purely typographical and requires correction to reflect the true position. 3 5. It is also noted that there is no objection from the opposite party to the correction sought. 6. In the interest of justice and to reflect the accurate representation of parties, this Court finds it appropriate to allow this instant MCC and rectify the order dated 29.04.2025 to correctly mention Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey as counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 6. 7. Accordingly, this MCC is allowed. The order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1764 of 2025 shall stand corrected to reflect Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate, as ‘counsel appearing for Respondent No. 6’ instead of the ‘petitioner’. Rest of the contents of the order shall remain intact. Certified Copy as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena