JUDGMENT : D K SINGH, J. The present writ appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 03.02.2023 passed in WP.No.39006/2015 was disposed and filed R.P.No.547/2003. 2. The appellant was the petitioner before the learned Single Judge, challenging the award dated 02.05.2015 passed by the Labour Court, Mysuru, in Reference No. 20 of 2013. Before the learned Single Judge, the petitioner-University took the stand that, out of 56 workmen, only 24 had actually worked for the University, while the others had not. 3. Considering this submission, the learned Single Judge found that the said 24 workmen were eligible for appointment and, as such, directed the petitioner- University to appoint them within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 4. Regarding the remaining 34 workmen, as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the impugned order, it was observed that if they claimed to have worked for the University, it would be open to them to separately challenge the matter or seek appointment. 5. The impugned judgment was passed based on the stand taken by the University itself. Consequently, we find no error in the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 6. With respect to the challenge against the order dated 19.06.2024 in R.P. No. 547 of 2023, the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the review petition and imposed costs of Rs.4,000/- for each of the 24 workmen. The learned Single Judge correctly observed that the judgment dated 03.02.2023 in W.P. No. 39006 of 2015 was passed based on the admitted stand of the petitioner- University that these 24 workmen were engaged on a daily-wage basis. Therefore, we also find that the order passed in the review petition does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. In view of the fact that the review petition remained pending, we condone the delay of 576 days in filing this writ appeal.