Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

- 26 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7910 HC-KAR 13.5. Thus, regarding ITI candidates there is already preference being given by reserving 40% of posts and it is clear from KEB Order dated 13.03.1997 wherein preference was provided in direct recruitment to those apprentice trained candidates in KEB in the matter of, "other things being equal, a trained apprentice should be given preference". The said reservation was applicable only for the post of "Assistant Lineman" and the same cannot be compared and made applicable to the present notification which is called for the selection of post of "Junior Station Attendant" and "Junior Powerman"

is called for recruitment by way of selection and as per KEB recruitment and promotion regulations, the education qualification is prescribed as "pass in SSLC or 10th standard examination conducted by the Government of Karnataka Institutions". That the selection to these posts will be made based on the mark obtained in 10th/SSLC qualification and qualifying endurance test, which is conducted to the eligible candidates in the ratio of 1:5. The petitioners have not participated in the recruitment process. As such, they have no right to challenge the recruitment notification or process of selection as per Annexure- R. 13.7. The issue regarding giving preference to apprentice to the post of "Assistant Lineman" has been considered by the Apex Court in the case of U.P.State Road Transport Corporation (supra).

13.8. That the Full Bench of High Court of Allahabad in the case of Arvind Gautam vs. State of U.P. and

- 29 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7910 HC-KAR Others reported in 1999 (3) AWC 2093 has held that "the expression 'other things being equal' in paragraph 12 and absence of exemption from competitive test in the said paragraph leads to the conclusion that all persons (including the apprentice) have to appear in the competitive test, as we would prescribe in respect of particular selection and if after the competitive test, any apprentice trainee gets equal marks than a non-apprentice candidate, then only preference to be given to the said apprentice trainee.".

6. In our view, the expression "other things being equal" in paragraph 12 and absence of exemption from competitive test in the said paragraph, leads to the conclusion that all persons (including the apprentices) have to appear in the competitive test, as may be prescribed in respect of the particular selection, and if after the competitive test, any apprentice trainee gets equal marks than a non-apprentice candidate, then only preference is to be given to the said apprentice trainee."