AKBAR KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these four writ petitions, a common point is involved and, therefore, it will be convenient to dispose them of by this single judgment.

(2.) THE petitioner Akbar khan (in S.B. Civil writ Petition No. 72 of 1981) was appointed semi permanent with effect from 31.1.71 vide order Ex.1. Similarly, petitioner Manilal (in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 148/81), La mi Narain (in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 149/81) and Sokat Ali (in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 73/81) were declared as semi -permanent with effect from 31.5.70, 31.3.71 and 1.7.70 respectively, vide orders marked Ex.1.

(3.) IN para 5 of their respective writ petitions, the petitioners have submitted that: The case of the petitioner was amongst those seven mistries which were referred to the Respondent No. 4 and who decided the case as above. The typed copy of the letter dated the 25th January 1979 of the Labour Welfare Officer, Jaipur, is enclosed as.... On behalf of the State, reply has been filed and the submissions made in para 5 of the writ petitions have been admitted. Thus, the petitioners submit that on the basis of admission in para 5 it is an admitted position that the petitioners were Civil Mistries and were working as Civil Mistries and they have rightly been given the benefits of that post. They further submit in para 7 of their respective writ petitions: That it is evident from the facts given above that the petitioner is semipermanent Civil Mistry and he is working as Civil Mistry with effect from 1.7.80 add the petitioner is still working as Civil Mistiy.... Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that he has corrected the typographical mistake in the case of Sokat Ali (S.B.C.W.P. No. 73/81) and it has been mentioned therein as 1.7.70. He further prays that he should be allowed to correct the typographical error in the other writ petitions.