Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. A counter affidavit has been filed for and on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Relying on the counter affidavit learned Government Pleader submits that the post of Asst. Engineers in the Irrigation Department is filled up through the Kerala Public Service Commission on reporting vacancies as and when arises in the department. The method of recruitment to the post in the Government Departments including the Irrigation Department is governed by the provisions of the Special Rules namely, the Kerala Engineering Subordinate Service Rules. As the Special Rules does not contain any provision for giving preference to an apprentice who has undergone apprenticeship training, the petitioner is not entitled for any preference to the post of Asst. Engineer. A quota is prescribed under the Special Rules for both direct recruitees and promotees and a ratio is fixed between Engineering Graduates, Diploma holders and Certificate holders. Learned Government Pleader further submits that Ext. P1 apprenticeship contract itself contained clause 5 to the effect that it is not obligatory on the part of the employer to offer any employment to the apprentice or the apprentice is not under any obligation to accept any employment offered by the employer. The selection to the post of Asst. Engineer (Civil) in the department is only through a process of selection and by a method of recruitment as prescribed by the Special Rules and for this purpose notifications are being issued by the Public Service Commission and hence, the rejection of the representation of the petitioner by Exts. P14 and P15 are legal and sustainable in law.

6. Before parting with this judgment in the light of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner it could be examined whether under the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961 a preference for appointment 10 any post of technical in character or engineering in nature be given to an apprentice trainee who has completed the training course successfully. In the decision reported in AIR 1995 SC 1115 (supra) the Apex Court has observed that the following would be kept in mind while dealing with the claim of trainees to get employment after successful completion of their training:-

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

7. As per Sub-section (aa) of Section 2 "apprentice" means a person who is undergoing apprenticeship training in pursuance of a contract of apprenticeship. Sub clause (aaa) defines "apprenticeship training" as a course of training in any industry or establishment undergone in pursuance of a contract of apprenticeship and under prescribed terms and conditions which may be different for different categories of apprentices. Sub-section (q) of Section 2 defines "trade apprentice" as an apprentice who undergoes apprenticeship training in any such trade or occupation as may be prescribed.

8. The definitions contained in the Act would indicate that a system of training in different trades giving under the post of engineering works or technical works of an establishment or an industry and if such trainees are trained by giving stipend or lump sum grant, such apprentices would get an advance training of the trades which may entitle them to get a preference for appointment in the post as and when such posts were arisen. To have a preference in appointment for an apprentice, the Act provides certain formalities such as registration, advising and also reservation of such post in the categories. The Honourable Supreme Court has considered various provisions of the Act and also the circumstances under which a preference would be granted to such apprentices as and when such posts to be filled up. As per Section 22 of the Apprentices Act it is not obligatory on the part of the employer who had imparted training to such apprentice to offer any employment to such trainees and it is also stipulated in the section that the trainees are not under the obligation to accept an employment under the employer. The Supreme Court has taken a view that if it is found having equal in the matter of appointment to various posts, the apprentice must have got preference.