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 Vs. 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 yearwise. 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."

17. From the above it is seen that other things being equal a trained apprentice is required to be given preference over direct recruits. A trainee need not get his name sponsored by any employment exchange. He is entitled to age relaxation to the extent of the period of training undergone by him. Those trained earlier would be treated as senior to those trained later and between the trainees senior should be given preference.

18. In the case of Uttar Pradesh Vidyut Parishad Apprentice Welfare Association and Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors reported in (2000) 5 SCC 438, the Apex Court while reiterating the above guidelines laid down in the case of Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (supra), however, added that the apprentices though entitled to the benefits of the above guidelines would still have to go through the procedure of examination/interview while seeking employment.