HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU RPOWP No.4/2017 in OWP No.938/2015 M/s Pritam Advertising Agency ….Petitioner(s) Through :- Mr. G.S.Thakur, Advocate V/s University of Jammu and others ….Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. A.P.Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 26.05.2025 1. By way of instant petition, the petitioner herein seeks review of judgment dated 29.12.2015, passed by this Court in OWP No.938/2015, whereby the writ petition has been disposed of finally. 2. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that while OWP No.938/2015 was pending disposal before this Court, the petitioner had preferred an application i.e. MP No.2/2015 thereby seeking a direction to the respondents to release the pending payment subject to outcome of the writ petition by deducting 12% amount with a further direction to the respondents that in the event of decision of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner, the respondents shall release the payment of deducted amount. However, due to an advertent error, the main writ petition i.e. 938/2015 came to be disposed of instead of MP No.2/2015. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the error occurred in the order under review is apparent on the face of record, as such, the order needs to be reviewed to the extent it has disposed of the main writ petition Serial No.31 2 along with connected MP. He submits that in order dated 19.12.2015, the Court was dealing only with the application moved by the petitioner, therefore, vide order dated 19.12.2015 only application ought to have been disposed of and not the entire writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 5. In paragraph No.2 of the order under review, this Court noted down the submission of the petitioner, which reads thus: “Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would be satisfied if the application is disposed of directing respondents to release the amount whatever due to him less than 12.6% without prejudice to this stand in the writ petition.” 6. A perusal of afore-quoted portion of the order under review reveals that the Court while passing order dated 29th December, 2015, was only considering the application of the petitioner. The submission of the petitioner was to direct the respondent to release the amount whatever due to him after deducting 12.5%, without prejudice to his stand in the writ petition. Therefore, only application, which was being considered by this Court, ought to have been disposed of and not the main writ petition. It appears that due to typographical error, the writ petition has been disposed of a/w connected MP.” 7. In view of the above, it becomes manifest that there is an error apparent on the face of record, as such, this petition needs to be allowed. Accordingly, order dated 29.12.2015, is reviewed to the extent it disposed of the main writ petition, it is provided that vide order dated 29.12.2015, only MP No.2/22015 is disposed of. As a consequence, the writ petition 3 (OWP No.938/2015) is restored to its original number and the Registry shall list the same on 21st July, 2025. Jammu: 26.05.2025 Vinod ) (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge Vinod Kumar 2025.05.27 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document