JUDGMENT Order on correction application no. 80591/16 1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This is an application for correction in the order dated 2.3.2016. It is submitted by the counsel for petitioner that in place of "section 16(3), section 63" and in place of "Civil Court", "District Judge", has been mentioned in third paragraph of the order. 3. The cause shown is sufficient. Accordingly, paragraph no. 3 of the aforesaid order which reads thus : "3. A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that the petitioners have an efficacious and alternative remedy of either filing an appeal against their grievance before the competent authority under Section 63 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 or may file a suit before the District Judge in this regard." has been corrected today and shall now be read as under : "3. A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that the petitioners have an efficacious and alternative remedy of either filing an appeal against their grievance before the competent authority under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 or may file a suit before the Civil Court in this regard." 4. The correction application stands allowed.