Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 14541
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member, Shalini Misra, Administrative Member
Seera Anjibabu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA/020/0147/2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Anita Swain
For the Respondents: Mrs. B Gayatri Varma, Sr.CGSC
No vested right to age relaxation for ex-apprentices; recruitment rules prevail; judicial legislation impermissible.
Headnote:The applicants, ex-naval apprentices from 2009-2016 batches trained at Naval Apprentices School, Visakhapatnam, challenged the upper age limit of 18-25 years in the 2022 recruitment notification for Tradesman (skilled) posts under SRO 150/2000, as amended by SRO 43/2012 and SRO 31/2017, claiming it violated Art.14 and Art.21. They alleged arbitrary exclusion despite seniority and preference over direct recruits holding NAC certificates, leading to overage status after a decade without absorption notifications. The court found no violation of recruitment rules or Apprentices Act 1961. Key issues framed: Whether fixing upper age limit for ex-naval apprentices is illegal, arbitrary, and ultra vires Art.14 and Art.21; whether SRO 31/2017 erroneously applies direct recruitment age criteria to ex-apprentices. Ratio: No vested right to age relaxation exists under Model Contract of Apprenticeship Training or recruitment rules; granting relaxation would legislate, impermissible per Supreme Court in M.S. Heble; matter covered by Coordinate Bench Mumbai OA/546/2022 & Batch dismissing similar claims. Original Application dismissed; no merit found; interim orders vacated; pending M.As. disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ex-apprentices challenge age limit in tradesman recruitment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondents defend rules under art.309; no automatic absorption. (Para 3 , 7) |
| 3. follows mumbai bench; no merit, oa dismissed. (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. applicants seek declaration of age criteria unconstitutional. (Para 6) |
ORDER
(As per Hon’ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member)
By this Original Application, the applicants are seeking the following relief(s):
“This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to call for the records after examining the same
(a). Declare the action of the Respondents, fixing upper age limit as criteria for being eligible to apply for the post of tradesman (skilled) for the ex-naval apprentices ( ex-apprentices of Dockyards apprentices school of Indian Navy) illegally and arbitrarily as null, void and violative of article 14 and 21 of constitution of India and
(b). Declare the amendment under SRO 31/2017 to the extent of erroneous fixing of the upper age limits for Naval apprentices is, as the same is ultra-virus to Article 14 and 21 of constitution of India.
(c). consequently direct the respondent's to receive the application from the applicants without reference to the upper age limit and permit them to participate in recruitment process and consider their candidature for Tradesman (skilled) vacancies as per their seniority in the respective trade(vacancies) as per the rules and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. .”
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants were ex-naval apprentices of Naval Apprentices School, Visakhapatnam of 2009-2016 batch. The applicants are in the panel of seniority list maintained by Naval Apprentice School ever since completion of their training waiting to be absorbed / recruited in to the Tradesman (skilled) post. as and when vacancies arises as per the SRO 150/2000. The SRO 150/200 was amended by SRO 43/2012, due to which 60 % designated posts of Naval Apprentices were opened for candidates holding National Apprentice Certificate (NAC) in relevant trade issued by NCCVT for direct recruitment. Though the applicants were selected in 2012 for the vacancies and subsequent vacancies for direct recruitment, but they were not considered by the respondents as the respondents considered the outsiders without giving preference to Ex-naval apprentices, due to which applicants were left out in spite of their eligibility, which is against the Apprentices Act 1961, as amended in 2014. By wrongly interpreting the rules, the respondents did not consider the applicants in the vacancies of Navy but considered outsiders. Since 2012 to till date, for the past 10 years, no notification for absorption/recruitment of ex-naval apprentices has been issued due to which the applicants became overaged. The recruitment rule SRO 43/2013 was further amended in 2017 vide SRO 31/2017, the rule deleted the direct recruitment of the candidates holding NAC certificates, and the 60% designated trade vacancies were meant exclusively for Ex-naval apprentices, however erroneously mentioned the age criteria in column 6 which meant for direct recruitment illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution. The impugned recruitment notification in Indian Navy was issued exclusively for ex-apprentices of Indian Navy on 18-2-2022, prescribing age limit 18 to 25 years. As per the notification, the applications are to be accepted through Online from 20-2-22 to 20-3-2022. Due to the age criteria fixed by the respondents the applications of the applicants are not being registered online, hence the applicants are before this Hon'ble Tribunal.
3. After notice the respondents have appeared through their counsel and opposed the relief on the ground that the Notification 01/2022 was issued for recruitment of civilian personnel in Indian Navy for the post of Tradesman (skilled). In the said notification, age limit between 18 and 25
