IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.- 2415 of 2008. Decided on : 10.09.2009. Sh. Ravi Shankar Dhiman. …….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. ………Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1No. For the petitioner : Mr. L.N. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): The case of the petitioner, in nut-shell, is that he had been working as Steno-typist with the respondent No. 3 since 1st August, 1988. He has neither been paid wages/pay scale of the post of Steno-typist/Clerk nor he has been regularized. The case of the respondents-State precisely is that the petitioner was initially appointed as daily rated Attendant w.e.f. 1.1.1988 and thereafter he was engaged as daily rated Ferrow Khalasi w.e.f. 1st September, 1988. According to the respondents, He had been discharging the duties as Ferrow Khalasi and he has been paid the wages for the Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. : 2 : same. The respondents have further stated in the reply that the certificates issued to the petitioner are not based on official record. The petitioner has not placed on record any document on the basis of which he was appointed at Steno-typist. He was in fact appointed as Ferrow Khalasi. He has failed to produce any tangible evidence on record to establish that he had been working as Steno-typist/Cleck exclusively. He had been regularized as Ferrow Khalasi on 29.04.1999. It is necessary to produce evidence and only thereafter the Courts can grant the relief. In the present case, the claim qua “equal pay for equal work” can not be decided on the basis of affidavits. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. September 10, 2009. (bhupender)