IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 7311 of 2008. Decided on 8th December, 2010. _____________________________________________________ Megh Singh Thakur. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : None. For the respondents. : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that his name has not been sponsored by the Employment Exchange (Ex-servicemen Cell) for the post of Laboratory Technician. 2. Case of the respondent-State precisely is that the requisition was sent to all the Employment Exchanges. However, the name of the petitioner was not sponsored. 3. A bare perusal of Annexure R-1, dated 06.07.1998 makes it abundantly clear that in fact the requisition was sent to all the Regional/District/Sub-Employment Exchanges in Himachal Pradesh for sponsoring the names of the candidates for training course of Laboratory Technician. Petitioner had attained the age of 50 years at the time when the writ petition was filed. We are now in 2010. Petitioner has become over-aged by now. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. - 2 - 4. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. However, in case the petitioner is still aggrieved, he can make a representation to the competent authority. Thereafter, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 08, 2010. (bhupender) - 3 - `