Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. Challenging the said settlement, the appellant filed the present writ petition and claimed that respondents 1 to 4 should be directed to reserve 50% of the semi-skilled/ unskilled and skilled jobs to the members of the appellant association in the N.L.C. Ltd. The grounds of challenge made by the appellant both before the learned Judge as well as before us, inter alia on other grounds, was on the ground that the members of the appellant association being trained apprentices under the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961, were entitled for preference as per the guidelines of the Ministry of Labour, Union of India as well as the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated September 20, 1995 P. Arul and Ors. v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its secretary, Madras and Ors., 1996-I-LLJ-376 (Mad). It was further contended that the lands belonging to the families of about 600 members of the appellant association for the establishment N.L.C. Ltd., for whom no job was given and therefore, on this ground also, they are entitled for the relief claimed.

"We are of the view that this Court has clearly laid down that the apprentice trainees have no right to be appointed in preference to other applicants..."

In fact, the Division Bench judgment relied upon by the appellant only followed the above referred to earlier decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P. Arul and Ors. v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, represented by its Secretary, Madras and Ors., (supra), yet, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while setting aside the order of the Division Bench, has ruled as above. Therefore, the apprentices who have undertaken training under the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961, did not acquire any special status in order to intend that they are entitled to seek for preference in the job opportunities in the various Government institutions, much less the members of the appellant in N.L.C. Ltd.