JUDGMENT 1. - By the instant writ petition, petitioner seeks setting aside the impugned Award dated 21-5-2001 (Annex. 21) and directing respondents to declare the petitioner as Typist/clerk with all consequential benefits. 2. On reference having been made, petitioner filed a claim petition before the Labour Court stating therein that he was appointed as daily rated typist, on 22-9-1987 and had been discharging the duties of typist but neither he has been regularised on the post of Typist nor he has been granted the salary of the post of typist. Respondents filed reply before the Labour Court controverting the stand taken by the petitioner. The Labour Court after appreciating the facts of the case law on the point and evidence on record, dismissed the claim petition. Hence this writ petition. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case as well as the impugned award. 4. Petitioner has not produced on record a copy of the appointment order showing that his appointment was made on the post of daily rated typist. He himself has produced a copy of the letter dated 14-7-87 (Annex.10) sent by the Executive Engineer to the Superintending Engineer seeking permission for appointment of the petitioner and one Shri Ramesh Paliwal as daily rated Labourers. An affidavit (Annex. 20) to this effect has been filed by the concerned Assistant Engineer to the effect that the petitioner was never asked to work as typist, rather was appointed and taken work of the daily rated (unskilled) employee at the wages of Rs. 14/- per day. Petitioner has stressed on the certificate dated 2-5-92 issued by the Chairman, Municipal Board, Pokaran to the effect that petitioner had worked as typist but the Chairman himself has made the position clear by stating that the petitioner might have typed some matter on any holiday. It has further been specifically stated in the affidavit Annex. 20 that since the date of initial appointment, petitioner has not worked as typist but he had been discharging the duties of Assistant and now he is working as semi-permanent Assistant. 5. I have carefully gone through the impugned Award. The Labour Court has appreciated the evidence on record and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was appointed as daily rated labourer and he was never appointed as daily rated typist, nor he worked as a typist. 5. I have carefully gone through the impugned Award. The Labour Court has appreciated the evidence on record and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was appointed as daily rated labourer and he was never appointed as daily rated typist, nor he worked as a typist. The conclusion arrived at by the Labour Court is based on proper appreciation of evidence, supported by sound reasoning. There is no illegality, irregularity or perversity in the findings of facts recorded by the Labour Court, which may require any interference by this Court. It was incumbent upon the petitioner to plead and prove his case by leading cogent and convincing evidence which he failed to do so. 6. Consequently, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.Petition dismissed. *******