Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

o Applicants in the present OAs have undergone apprenticeship training at Naval Dockyard, Visakhapatnam during various years. Although the establishment has no obligation to offer employment to these ex-DAS apprentices sometimes they may offer employment to these personnel in accordance with such Recruitment Rules that the Union of lndia may promulgate from time to time. Prior to May 2012, lhe t6 \ I Recruitment Rules as d SRO 150/2000, as amended vide SRO 26212002 were in force. The said SRO provided for filling up of 60% of the vacancies by absorption of the Ex-DAS apprentices. As long as the said SRO was in force, various notifications for absorptions of Ex-DAS apprentices have been issued and accordingly qualified Ex-DAS apprentices have been absorbed. Applicants also had a fair opportunity to participate in these absorption process. The revised recruitment rules for the recruitment of the Tradesman have been promulgated by the Government of lndia vide SRO 4312012 dated 18-05-2012. As against 60% of the vacancies to be filled up by absorption from ex-DAS apprentices the revised recruitment rules now specify 60% of the vacancies to be filled up from amongst all the candidates holding the National Apprenticeship Certificate (NAC) issued by the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) (which all the ex-DAS apprentices also acquire on successful competition of the training). The balance 40o/o vacancies are to be filled up by promotion. The revised recruitment rules also specify an uniform age limit for recruitment of Tradesman into the Dockyard whether they are Ex-DAS apprentices or other general candidates' The revised recruitment rules therefore require selection to be made from amongst a larger pool of candidates of which all ex-DAS apprentices could also apply subject to their eligibility. Therefore the contention of the applicants that the pool of candidates from \{ :i ffi amongst which 60% of the vacancies are to be filled up should not be enlarged and that should be restricted to only ex_DAS apprentices cannot be agreed to. The contention of the applicants that no age limit should be specified for employment from amongst the ex-DAS apprentices also cannot be acceded to. Although certain preference for absorption of ex_DAS apprentices was provided under SRO 150/2000 applicants have no right to claim that such preference should be provided till eternity when in the first place the Dockyard has no obligation to provide any employment to the applicants.

"9. We have said so far as reference to that Circular shows that all it has done is to lay down the procedure for the selection of the apprentices, which did not require the apprentices to undergo any written examination for selection W rll "z and their routing through em t exchange was done away with. Something was said about the age also. No promise of employment can be read in this Circular which is of 21"1 December, 1977. \Ne would say the same about the Memo of the Directorate of Training and Employment of the State of U.P. Dated 21"t September, 1977 as it falls short of any promise of employment, because what it says is that full efforts should be mad to provide the trainees with service. ln this memo what had been stated in para 2 of the Government of lndia's letter dated 31-8-1978 had been quoted in which it was mentioned that the scheme of training had been introduced to promote chances of employment of educated employed persons; and that if employers would not provide employment to the qualified apprentices the same would amount to destruction of developed human resources. lt is because of this that the government of lndia expressed the desire that "other things being equal trained apprentices should be given preference in case of employment.".

(1) Other things being equal, a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct recruits.

\\) ( -l o (2) For this, a trainee would not be required to get his name sponsored by any employment exchange. The decision of this Court in Union of lndia v. Hargopat, AtR 1987 SC 1221, would permit this.

(3) lf age bar would come in the way of the trainee, the same would be relaxed in accordance with what is stated in this regard, if any, in the concerned service rule. lf the service rule be silent on this aspect, relaxation to the extent of the period for which the apprentice had undergone training would be given.

(4) The concerned training institute would maintain a list of the persons trained year wise. The persons trained earlier would be treated as senior to the persons trained later. ln between the trained apprentices, preference shall be given to those who are senior.

19. Similarly this Tribunal while deciding the issue in respect of fixation of upper age limit contrary to SRO 150/2000 in OA No. 51l20OB and batch (decided on 01-03-2010) observed as under .

"Therefore in cases where the respondents could not absorb the apprentices of previous years purely for want of vacancies, such apprentices cannot be deprived of consideration for absorption while considering their juniors for absorption. It is not as if ex-naval apprentices are claiming absorption straightaway as of right. Admittedly, there is a written test prescribed for selection. Only those who get through in the competitive examination alone get a chance for absorption. Therefore, merely because apprentices have completed their training long back, it cannot be presumed that they are not fit for consideration for absorption. As admittedly, the method of filling up tradesmen (skilled) post is by way of selection-cum-seniority,the respondents have got an opportunity to test their skills before absorbing them. As the trade test is being \t e.