Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the review petitioner/Corporation submits that the review is limited only to the extent of seeking deletion of the observations contained in the judgment, made against the Chief Law Officer of the Corporation. It is mentioned that, in a statement filed in the writ petition on 13.6.2013 certain errors occurred due to a bonafide mistake which was neither wilful, deliberate nor intentional. It is further mentioned that if there would have been any opportunity to rectify the mistake the Corporation would have cured the same by rendering unconditional apology. 2. While considering the review petition it is noticed that, in compliance with the direction contained in the judgment dt. 13.11.2013 the Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation had already issued a proceedings dated 11.3.2014 regularising the writ petitioner in the service of the Corporation. In view of compliance of the direction and in view of the averments contained in the review petition, this court is of the opinion that the observations made against the Chief Law Officer can be deleted. Accordingly the review petition is allowed to the extent of deleting the observations contained in para (2) of the judgment, dated 13.11.2013 made against the Chief Law Officer of the Corporation.
3. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that, despite regularisation of the petitioner through the proceedings dated 11.3.2014, he was not assigned duty and not paid salary on the basis of the regularisation. It is left open to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for getting salary from the Corporation with effect from the date of regularisation.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE pmn/