IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rekha Palli, J.
Shiwang Tripathi - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 6811 of 2022, CM Appl. 20673 of 2022 (interim relief) & CM Appl. 22487 of 2022 (additional documents)
Decided On : 03-06-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek regularization of services. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioners argue obligations for absorption. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court examines apprenticeship obligations. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. court addresses estoppel and discrimination. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Rekha Palli, J. The 97 petitioners, who are working as accounts apprentices with the respondent no.2 company/National Insurance Company Limited, having been appointed pursuant to the selection conducted in terms of an advertisement issued on 01.11.2018, have approached this Court seeking a direction to the said respondent to regularize their services as Administrative Officer (Scale I) with all service and consequential benefits, including seniority.
2. The brief factual matrix as necessary for adjudication of the petition may be noted hereinbelow.
3. Upon an advertisement being issued by the respondent no.2 on 01.11.2018 for recruitment of 150 accounts apprentices on `All-India' basis, the petitioners have applied for the said post. The advertisement, besides specifying the eligibility conditions for recruitment, also provided that the period of apprenticeship would be two years (twenty-four months), which period was extendable at the discretion of the respondent company. The selected apprentices were to be paid a stipend of Rs.25,000/- per month (all inclusive) and medical coverage in the first year, and Rs.30,000/- per month (all inclusive) along with medical coverage in the second year. All the selected candidates were required to furnish an apprentice bond undertaking therein that if they were to leave the services of the respondent company within one year, they would be liable to pay the bond amount of Rs.1 lakh (Rupees One Lakh) to the said company.
4. The petitioners upon being successful in the selection process, which included a written examination and interview, were issued appointment letters on 06.06.2019, pursuant to which they were posted at different locations across the country. Their performance during their apprenticeship training at the respondent company was duly appreciated by their superior officers from time to time and, on 22.06.2021, their period of apprenticeship was, with the approval of respondent's Board, extended till 31.12.2021. On 31.12.2021, this period of apprenticeship was once again, with the approval of the Board, extended for a further period of six months i.e., till 30.06.2022.
5. As the extension letter dated 31.12.2021 specified that it was the final extension being granted to the Accounts Apprentices, the petitioners apprehending termination of their services after 30.06.2022, submitted representations to the respondents seeking their absorption as Administrative Officers (Scale I). However, since no steps were taken by the respondent company to regularize their services, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of the present petition.
6. In support of the petition, learned senior counsel for the petitioners Mr. A.K. Sinha has made the following submissions:
(i) He submits that the petitioners having been appointed as Accounts Apprentices after undergoing a comprehensive selection process in terms of the advertisement dated 01.11.2018 issued by respondent no.2, wherein they were assured that in case there were vacancies for the post of Administrative Officer (Scale I), they would be considered for absorption, subject to their performance being satisfactory, and only on this stipulation contained in the advertisement, the petitioners left their erstwhile service(s) to join the respondent company. He submits that once the vacancies of Administrative Officer (Scale I) are available with the respondent company, and the performance of the petitioners have been found to be `Outstanding', with recommendations having been made by the Divisional/Senior Divisional Managers that they deserved to be absorbed as permane
The court ruled that there was no obligation for the employer to absorb apprentices as permanent employees unless explicitly stated in the apprenticeship agreement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that apprentices cannot claim absorption as regular employees based on the terms of the Apprentices Act, 1961, and the conditions of their appointm....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a claim may be dismissed on the grounds of estoppel and res judicata if similar grievances have been considered and dismissed in previous liti....
Temporary or contractual engagements in academic arrangements do not confer rights for continuation beyond the specified term, and interim court orders do not establish permanent employment rights.
The court recognized the right of the State to appoint persons on temporary basis to meet its exigencies, and held that the failure of the ATTC to maintain the student to lecturer ratio and the petit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of the legal principles established in Umadevi's case to the appellant's claim for regularisation, considering the stipulations i....
Part-time employees cannot claim regularization or a permanent position without a sanctioned post, as established by the court's ruling.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.