IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No.1709 of 2011 Date of Decision: September 22, 2011 Santosh Kumar ..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .. Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advcoate for respondent No.3. __________________________________________ Surjit Singh, Judge (oral) Petitioner has been working as a daily-waged driver with Nagar Panchayat, Santokhgarh, District Una, since 1998. He looks for regularization of his service. According to him, a reference was made by the Director, Urban Development, Shimla, respondent No.2 herein, to the State of H.P. (respondent No.1) for creating a post of driver, in regular pay-scale for regularizing him, but the State has not taken any decision so far, though such a reference was made long back. Resolution for regularizing Whet her report ers of t he l ocal papers may be al l owed t o see t he j udgment ? É2É the services of petitioner was passed by the Nagar Panchayat, impleaded as respondent No.3, in the year 2008, copy Annexure P-1. So, the petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a direction to the respondents to regularize his services. 2. Respondents No.1 and 2, in their common reply, have stated that petitioner is though eligible for regularization and the Screening Committee has also recommended that his services be regularized, yet for want of post of driver, his services have not been regularized. It has been stated that a reference has been made to the Government for creation of the post of a driver and that services of the petitioner will be regularized, as and when the Government creates the post. 3. Respondent No.3, in its reply, has stated that it has already taken up the matter with respondent No.1 for creation of post of driver and that as and when the post is created, services of the petitioner will be regularized. 4. In view of the above stated position, writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to respondent No.1 to take a decision, on the already made reference by respondent No.2 as also by respondent No.3, for creation of the post of driver, within two months from today. While taking the decision, Government may keep in mind that respondent No.3, while writing to respondent No.2, vide É3É letter dated 20.8.2010, copy Annexure P-7, has stated that it (respondent No.3 -Nagar Panchayat) has already passed a resolution on 2.6.2009 that it is capable of bearing the expenditure of the pay of the post of driver, in regular pay scale. Dispose of. September 22, 2011 (ss) (Surjit Singh), J.