SPA No.146/09 Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. (Review Application No.469/2011) (Delay Condonation Appln. No.6455/11) Mr. Bindesh Kumar Gupta, Addl. A.G. for the State/ appellant. Mr. Gopal Narain, Advocate for the respondent/applicant. We have considered the averments made in the application and being satisfied that sufficient grounds have been furnished for the delay in filing the review application, we allow the application for condonation of delay. This review application seeks review of the judgment and order of the Division Bench rendered on 14.3.2011 in Special Appeal No.146 of 2009. It is being contended that the Division Bench was not right in stating in paragraph no.3 of the judgment that apart from the two certificates, there is nothing else on record to demonstrate whether the petitioner was engaged as a daily wage Draughtsman or as a daily wage Class-IV employee. In the application for review, it has been contended that in addition to those, two more orders were annexed to the supplementary affidavit to the writ petition. Those two documents do not indicate appointment of the petitioner as Draughtsman. They suggest engagement of the petitioner as assistant to the Draughtsman. In the judgment under review, it has been clearly mentioned that the Rules do not contemplate engagement of assistant to the Draughtsman or Assistant Draughtsman. Those documents, even if looked at, would have no effect on the ultimate decision rendered in the judgment under review. We, accordingly, dismiss the review application. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 05.07.2011 Rdang