Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

C. Issue appropriate directions to the respondents herein to forthwith grant 3rd MACP to the applicant herein w.e.f. 01.03.2013 on his having duly completed 30 years of regular service in the railways by taking into account the period which the applicant herein had spent in training at the initial stage as Traffic Apprentice prior to his absorption as Traffic Inspector in 1988 and grant all the consequential benefits, including arrears of salary, interest thereof, calculation of pension amount accordingly having regard to the fact that the applicant herein is due to retire in January 2018.
D. Grant such other and further relief/s as may be deemed fit and proper in the peculiar facts & circumstances of the present case.

2. The case of the applicant is briefly mentioned as under: -

:: 3 :: O.A./58/2018 .

2.1 The applicant was recruited to class - III Service as Traffic Apprentice in the Scale of 425-700 vide letter dated 20.12.1985 (Annexure A/3). This recruitment letter states that (i) he was temporarily recruited as Traffic Apprentice in the said Scale;

6. Heard both the counselat length. We find that the records brought before us clearly establish the following: -

6.1 On the recommendation of the RRB the applicant was temporarily appointed as Traffic Apprentice in the scale of 425-640/- vide letter dated 20.12.1985 and was required to undergo initial training of five and a half months (First Visit) starting from 19.12.1985 and that appointment was to take effect from the date he joined the training. Accordingly, the temporary appointment as Traffic Apprentice took effect from 19.12.1985. The impugned letter from the respondent to the applicant dated ---10-1988 (Annexure A/1) mentions the following:
6.4 We have also respectfully gone through the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in HPGC Case (supra), which has made significant observation with regard to definition of Apprentice under the Apprenticeship Act. It is obvious on the face of it that in view of the specific provision of Apprentice and Trainee in the IREM, the Traffic Apprentices of Railway are different and distinguishable from the Apprentices of the Apprenticeship Act of 1961. We have quoted the relevant Provisions above and have relied on the respondents own letter dated 20.12.1985 which unambiguously says that the applicant was temporarily appointed as Traffic Apprentice in a specified scale and was detailed for institutional training as per the provisions contained in IREM and after completion of the stipulated training the person was appointed to a substantive or working post in accordance to the provisions of respondents. Nowhere it mentions that the Traffic apprentice is an apprentice under the Apprenticeship Act. These definitions distinguish the nature of engagement of apprentices. But by referring to the definition of the term "regular service" in the MACPS, we do not find any justification to exclude the training period after making it clear in black and white that it was an appointment albeit temporary. For the sake of clarity we quote from the Rule 9 ibidem which reads that "Service render in ad-hoc/contract basis, before regular appointment on pre- appointment training, shall not :: 13 :: O.A./58/2018 .