IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 15845 of 2008. Decided on: 13.05.2011. _________________________________________________ Gulab Singh. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been working as daily waged Fitter. It is also borne out from the contents of Annexure A-1, dated 4th February, 1980 that 20 posts stood sanctioned for the purpose of regularization in the category of Fitter. However, the petitioner was regularised as Helper instead of Fitter. Petitioner made a representation for the redressal of his grievance to the Engineer-in-Chief vide 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - Annexure A-5. However, till date no decision has been taken on the same. 2. Consequently, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization to the post of Fitter as per representation made by him to the Engineer-in-Chief against 20 posts which were sanctioned vide Annexure A-1, dated 4th February, 1980, within a period of eight weeks after the production of certified copy of this judgment, with all consequential benefits. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. May 13, 2011. (sck).