1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP No. 10134/2026 in CWP No.17964/2025 Decided on: 11.05.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anmol Kumar …..Applicant/ Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant/Petitioner: Mr. Vikrant Thakur and Mr. Piyush Agnihotri, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Himanshu Kapila, Advocate vice Ms. Madhurika Sekhon Verma, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 2 & 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Himanshu Kapila, learned counsel and Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and respondents No. 2 & 3, respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record memo of parties. 2. Petitioner seeks correction of typographical error in para-2 of the judgment Anmol Kumar versus State of H.P and others2 in as much as according to the petitioner, 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2CWP No.17964/2025, decided on 25.11.2025 2 the words option ‘C’ figuring in 2nd last line of para-2 of the judgment is required to be replaced by the words option ‘A’. 3. None of the learned counsel for the respondents have any objection to the above prayer. Learned counsel for the respondents have jointly submitted that it was indeed a typographical mistake in para-2 of the judgment where option ‘C’ has been reflected to be correct answer of question No.57 of ‘A’-series in terms of opinion of subject expert as it was actually option ‘A’ mentioned as correct answer given by the subject expert for question No.57 of ‘A’- series. On considering the pleadings of this application as also, all the appended paperbook of the main petition, as also, the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, prayer is accepted. Para-2 of the judgment rendered in Anmol Kumar2 shall be read as under:- “2. Question No.87 in ‘D’ Series is admittedly Question No.57 of ‘A’ Series. Learned counsel for respondent No.3-H.P. Public Service Commission submits that in view of large number of representations received by the Commission and also considering the number of writ petitions preferred regarding the final answer key published by the Commission, wherein key answer to Question No.57 of ‘A’ Series was depicted as option ‘A’, whereas, according to the candidates, the correct answer was option ‘C’, the matter was referred to the Subject Experts, who after detailed deliberations, have given the opinion that option ‘A’ is the correct answer for Question No.57 of ‘A’ Series. Learned counsel for respondent No.3- Commission further submits that consequential action on the basis of opinion of Subject Expert by 3 revising the final answer key would be taken within ten days.” 4. Office to carry out necessary corrections. Application stands disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 11, 2026 Judge yogesh