IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL At NAINITAL. II Review Petition No. 10192 of 2003 Bilal Ahamd and 12 others …..Applicant/Petitioners. IN Contempt Petition No. 267 of 2001 Dinesh Kumar and another. ….Petitioners Versus Sri Harish Chandra Joshi, District magistrate Haridwar, And others. …..Respondents ………………….. Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Heard Sri Manoj Tewari, learned counsel for the review petitioners and Sri Ashish K. Joshi, for the petitioners. By this review petition, the petitioner have sought review of the judgment and order dated 14.08.2002 passed in Contempt Petition No. 267 of 2001, by which the contempt petition has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the order sought to be reviewed in which it has been provided that those Collection Amins who are working under the High Court orders, shall be ceased to work, if there is no sanction of the Commissioner and no work is available. The Seasonal Collection Amins are appointed against the temporary posts sanctioned by the Commissioner for every season. Therefore, order sought to be reviewed is misconceived. I find no infirmity in the order passed on 14.08.2002. However, it is provided that in case the review petitioners are working for more than four Faslies’, they shall be considered for regular appointments under 35% quota according to rule under Section-5 of the U.P. Collection Amins Service Rules 1974. If the Commissioner’s sanction is available for the next season, the review petitioners and petitioner No. 1 & 2 of the Contempt Petition shall be given work according to their seniority, ignoring the service rendered by them, in compliance of the High Court’s order. This order shall operate only to the petitioners of the review petition. Termination for want of sanction in regard to the review petitioner is valid one. Therefore, it is directed that they shall deposit their ‘Bastas’ (official records) in the office of the Collector and after depositing the Bastas, the Collector shall comply with the aforesaid order. Subject to above, the review petition is dismissed. (P.C. Verma, J.) November 24, 2003: NCM: