1. After hearing the Original Petition, we dictated judgment in open court on the 19th December, 1973. The operative portion of the judgment then dictated reads as follows:

"To sum up, we decline the prayer embodied in prayer No. 3 in the petition. We declare that the alleged appointment of the petitioner on the 1st of March, 1972 we guard ourselves by saying alleged appointment because some doubt was raised about the fact of appointment was an appointment to a post recognised by the Ordinances that were applicable at that time and further that in regard to that appointment no approval of the University was necessary. But we decline to grant any further relief to the petitioner."

2. On the 22nd of December, 1973, within three days of the delivery of the judgment by dictation to the Shorthand Writer, the petitioner has moved C M.P. No. 15852 of 1973 to withdraw the prayer No. 3 from the Original Petition. The question is whether this prayer can be granted. This petition was opposed by the Advocate General on behalf of the State. He contended that a judgment can be pronounced by dictation to the Shorthand Writer, that the judgment has been pronounced on the 19th of December