Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

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

(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 India V.N. Hargopal would permit this. (3) If 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 service rule concerned. If 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 training institute concerned would maintain a list of 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."

30. A perusal of the guiding factors, as enumerated above, would show that even though by virtue of provisions contained in Section 22(i), it is not obligatory for the employer to provide a regular job to the trainee, it is by considering the facts and circumstances of the case that it was ordered that other things being equal, a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct recruits and further that a trainee would not be required to get this name sponsored by any employment exchange and still further that even the age bar, if the same may come in the way of the trainee, needs to be relaxed. These directions came to be issued, even though there was no duty cast upon the Corporation in the said case to give regular employment to the apprentices and there was no corresponding right with the trainee to get regular job.