Amitava Lala, J. - (1.)This application is made for the purpose of modification of the order passed by this Court on 21st Nov., 2002 while disposing of the writ petition. The contention of the petitioners is that on the self-same ground this Court has been pleased to pass an affirmative order on 8th Jan., 2002 in W.P. No. 2559 of 2001 (Kamrun Nessa & Six Others Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors). The facts of that case and this case are more or less identical and in such circumstances the petitioners are also entitled to an identical order. However, here also I find an affirmative order was passed in favour of the petitioners but not at par with the earlier order for which the petitioners are really interested. The operative part of the order in the earlier case is as follows :
"Therefore, taking into totality of the matter I am of the view that the order impugned cannot be sustainable. Therefore, the same is set aside as a consequential effect and the petitioners will be entitled for approval of the service and the same will be done by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Calcutta under the strength of the order of the Court within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order.

Thus the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs".
The operative part of the order in the present case is as follows :
"Thus, taking into totality of the matter, I am of the view, that the order passed by the Director of School Education in rejecting the prayers of the petitioners cannot be sustained.

Therefore, the same stands set aside.

The District Inspector of Schools is directed to form a DLI Team to visit the school on a working day upon notice to the all concerned within a week from the date of communication of the order. The team will inspect the matter and furnish a report within a period of two weeks from such date. Thereafter District Inspector of Schools will forward the report to the Director of School Education within one week thereafter. The Director of School Education will take all possible steps within one month from the date of forwarding the report.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs".

(2.)The real contention of the petitioners in the application for modification is replacement of the similar order even in the case in which this application is made. Firstly, the question is about maintainability of the application. Secondly, the question is in respect of replacement of the order.
(3.)Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharyee, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended that principally Code of Civil Procedure is applied in the writ petition. Therefore, even after disposal of the writ petition an application can be made under Sec. 152 of the Civil Procedure Code. Sec. 152 speaks about amendment of judgments, decrees or orders. Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein for any accidental slip or omission made at any time be corrected by the Court either of its own motion or on the basis of application of any of the parties. He contended that passing of the order as aforesaid is nothing but an accidental slip. In fact, I was not convince at the prima facie stage and directed the State authorities and school authorities to address this Court in this respect.
;