MCC No.268 of 2010 CLMA No.2885 of 2010 In WPSS No.1430 of 2004 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. U.K. Uniyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the respondents/applicants. Delay condonation application is allowed. Delay in filing review application is condoned. The learned Single Judge found that the petitioner had been appointed under the dying-in- harness rules but was made to work on a daily rated basis. The writ court accordingly disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to pay regular salary to the petitioner while relying upon a decision of the Division Bench in the case of Ravi Karan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, (1999) 3 UPLBEC 2263, wherein it was held that the appointments made under the dying- in-harness rules are substantive in nature. A review application has been filed indicating that the petitioner was appointed as a daily wager and he was given seasonal appointment. No proof of this averment has been filed either in the review application nor is found in the counter affidavit. Further, there is no averment that the petitioner was never appointed under the dying-in-harness rules. In view of the aforesaid, the review application fails and is dismissed. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 28.04.2010 Shiv