The appointment of the petitioners as trainees under the PET Scheme did not automatically entitle them to regular appointments as LDCs, and the order granting notional fixation of pay did not obligate the government to provide all other benefits of regular service.

JUDGMENT :

M.S. Sonak, J.

1. Heard Mrs. Agni, the learned Senior Advocate along with Advocate Jay Sawaikar for the petitioners and Mr. Manish Salkar, the learned Government Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 10. The remaining respondents, though served, are neither present nor represented.

2. The petitioners are all Lower Division Clerks (LDCs), working as such, in various Departments of the Government of Goa.

3. In pursuance of a Scheme known as Pre-Employment Trainees Scheme (PETS), formulated by the State Government, an advertisement was issued, inviting applications for various posts including LDCs. The advertisement merely stated that in terms of PET Scheme, applicants, upon selection, will be appointed as trainees against the stipend of Rs.1,500/- per month, which the trainees will have to refund, if they discontinue the training course, amidst the training or do not accept the job offered to them upon satisfactory completion of the training. The advertisement also indicates that there are 350 probable vacancies for the post of LDC.

4. The petitioners were selected and offered purely temporary appointments in terms of memorandum dated 16.02.2004, which is representation of the memorandum issued to several petitioners in this Petition. For sake of convenience and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, we take the case of petitioner no. 6, Suvarna R. Sarmalkar as representative of cases of other petitioners in the present Petition.

5. The offer of appointment had made it clear that the appointment is under the PET Scheme on a stipend of Rs.1,500/- per month during the 18 months of the training period. The offer also made it clear that the appointment is temporary and will not confer any title to the permanent appointment. The aforesaid would be subject to several other conditions, which was reflected in memorandum dated 16.02.2004. The petitioners were also required to sign an agreement, which has been placed on record and it contains terms similar to those set out in the offer of appointment. After all this, the petitioners were appointed as trainee LDCs under the PET Scheme on a stipend of Rs.1,500/- per month during the 18 months training period. Insofar as the petitioner no. 6 is concerned, the date of commencement of her training was 01.06.2004.

6. The petitioners have pleaded that all the petitioners completed their 18 months training on 31.12.2005. There is no serious dispute on the part of respondent nos. 1 to 10 to this position.

7. The petitioners were however, not offered any regular appointment to the post of LDCs, even though, it is their case that the PET Scheme contemplates such offer of regular appointment, no sooner 18 months training period is successfully completed. The petitioners have placed on record a news bulletin dated 16.03.2005, which inter alia speaks about the review of the PET Scheme. The news bulletin inter alia provides that the claim was discontinued, but, would continue to apply only to 1030 trainees, in respect of Government Primary Teachers, Assistant Teachers, Steno Typists, LDCs, Graduates and Drivers, till they are all absorbed. The news bulletin also states that the absorption of all these 1030 trainees will take time and their training will not be extended beyond 31.03.2005.

8. There is no serious dispute that the petitioners were included in 1030 trainees referred to in the news bulletin dated 16.03.2005. There is also no dispute that notwithstanding what was provided in the news bulletin, the training of the petitioners continued until 31.12.2005 i.e. beyond 31.03.2005.

9. As noted earlier, the petitioners upon completion of training were not provided any regular appointment as LDCs, instead, there was proposal to fill in post of LDCs by direct recruitment. The petitioners apprehending that the posts against which they ought to have been regularized, would be filled in by such direct recruits and further apprehending that their services as trainees would be discontinued, ins