What a beautiful coin ! thank you Oesho to have shown it.
According to the datation of the dam, 1024 is absolutely clear and there is no other possibility of reading; in an other hand, the regnal year (no doubt, it is well the RY on left of "falus") is also quite clear :"20", and what I wanted to say is that probably indicates an error from the die engraver with two possibilities :"1034" instead of "1024", or "20" instead of "10".
Such mistakes on mughal coins are not common but may be encountered, why not here?.....