JUDGMENT The writ petition filed by the appellant seeking to challenge the legality of an order dated 21 February 2011 passed by the District Magistrate, Pilibhit rejecting a claim for regularization has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The second relief was to consider the claim of the appellant for regularization. The Collector and District Magistrate in his order dated 21 February 2011 recorded that the appellant had both in his oral submissions and in writing accepted that he was engaged as a daily wager at the Kisan Sahkari Sugar Mill, Majhola, Pilibhit. On this basis, it was submitted that merely because the appellant may have worked in the camp office of the Collector from time to time this did not establish a relationship of employment between the State and the appellant and that he had failed to make out a case for regularization. We have duly perused the certificates which the appellant had annexed to the writ proceedings. The certificates dated 17 July 2005 and 26 April 2006 issued by the Collector, Pilibhit, clearly indicate that the appellant was a daily wager and employed by the Kisan Sahkari Sugar Mill, Majhola, Pilibhit. The fact that the appellant may have been attached to the camp office of the Collector from time to time would not entitle him to claim regularization in service. The record indicates that the relationship of employment was between the appellant and the sugar mill. In these circumstances, the dismissal of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge would not call for interference in the special appeal. The special appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.