Employment cannot be guaranteed post-apprenticeship; transparency and fairness in hiring processes are mandated.

ORDER

By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J).

This Original Application has been filed by the applicants seeking direction to the respondents to engage them as substitutes in Group ‘D’pursuance to completion of apprenticeship training.

2. In their reply, the respondents have stated that there is no provision for employment in Government services after completion of training. The Railway Board has issued RBE No.34/2010 pursuant to amendment to Section 22 Sub-section (1) of the Apprentices Act, 1961 by giving preference to 20% of the vacancies in case of direct recruitment to posts/categories in Pay Band-1 to Course Completed Act Apprentices. Prior to issuance of said RBE, Course Completed Act Apprentices can be engaged as substitutes in Group D only in administrative exigencies and not as a regular measure.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that issue involved in this Original Application has already been considered and decided by this Tribunal in OA No.200/786/2017 on 28.06.2023. He prays that this Original Application may also be disposed of in similar terms.

4. We find that while deciding the Original Application No.200/786/2017 (supra), this Tribunal has observed that the rules which prevailed at the time of the training were to be considered and henceforth directions were issued to the respondents therein to consider the cases of the applicants in accordance with the rules prevailed at the time of training. The relevant paragraphs of the order read as under:

“

6. The short question involved in this case is whether the applicants, who have passed the trade test under The Apprenticeship Act 1961, are entitled to get the appointment or not ?. Admittedly, the factual matrix of the case have not been disputed by either of the parties. All the applicants except applicant no.2 have admittedly passed the trade test by underwent the training during the period from 19.9.2009 to 18.3.2011, while the applicant no.2 has completed the training during the period from 22.9.2009 to 21.9.2010.

7. We may note that the very purpose of the Act is to provide skilled candidates for employment and there may not be obligation in law to provide employment. However, every action of the respondents is expected to be transparent, fair and reasonable. In whole of the reply, the respondents have failed to offer any justification/explanation for not providing employment to the applicants especially when other similarly situated persons were granted employment. Although it is a case of the applicants that many junior persons having on the similar footing have been appointed, but the applicants have failed to point out any name which would show that the respondents have appointed such person ignoring the claim of the applicants.

8. Submission of learned counsel for the respondents is that there is no provision for employment in government service after completion of training. From the bare reading of Apprentice Act, 1961, it is clear that there is no provision for giving employment in the government after completion of training. To this extent, the argument of learned counsel for respondents has force and nobody can claim employment in government after completion of training under Apprenticeship Act. 1961.

9. Since the applicants have underwent the training under Apprenticeship Act, 1961 successfully during the year 2010-11 and as such by passage of time, all the applicants must have crossed the upper age limit to appear in other government jobs and as such a lenient view is being taken to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the applicants for appointment according to the Rules, which prevailed at the time of their training as per the ratio laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashis