JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an Engineering Graduate in the stream of Mechanical Engineering. He has applied for selection for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer [Quality Assurance (Armament Weapons)] in response to an invitation made by the second respondent. Similarly, he has applied for selection for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer [Quality Assurance (Engineering Equipment)] in response to an invitation made by the third respondent. Experience in the relevant field for a period of one year was one of the requirements in terms of the notifications issued by respondents 2 and 3 for appointment to the aforesaid posts.

The petitioner had worked as a graduate apprentice with the fourth respondent for a period of one year. Ext.P2 is the certificate issued to the petitioner by the fourth respondent in this regard. It is on the strength of Ext.P2 certificate that the petitioner has applied for selection for appointment to the said posts. After the written examination, the candidature of the petitioner was provisionally rejected by the second respondent on the ground that the nature of work performed by the petitioner has not been mentioned in the experience certificate produced by him. Ext.P3 is the notice published by the second respondent in this regard. Similarly, after the written examination, the third respondent has included the petitioner in the select list only provisionally on the very same ground. Ext.P5 is the communication issued by the third respondent to the petitioner in this regard. In terms of Ext.P5, the petitioner was directed to furnish experience certificate clearly indicating the nature of duties performed by him as a graduate apprentice in the establishment of the fourth respondent. The petitioner thereupon requested the fourth respondent to issue a fresh certificate in tune with the requirements of respondents 2 and 3. Ext.P6 is the communication addressed by the petitioner to the fourth respondent in this regard. Ext.P6 is now replied by the fifth respondent, the officer concerned of the fourth respondent, stating that the experience certificate has been issued as per their practice and no fresh certificate can be issued. Ext.P7 is the communication issued by the fifth respondent in this regard. The writ petition is filed thereafter seeking directions to the fourth respondent to issue experience certificate to the petitioner detailing the experience gained by him while working as apprentice trainee with the fourth respondent.

2. A statement has been filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5. The stand taken in the statement is that the petitioner has been given only an opportunity for training in the establishment of the fourth respondent in terms of the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961; that he was not selected or recruited by the fourth respondent to do any work; that apprenticeship training is only a course of training under prescribed terms and conditions which may be different for different categories of apprentices; that the petitioner was never assigned any duties or work in the course of the training and that he was only allowed to observe and learn from the actual employees.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5.

4. Exts.P9 and P10 are the invitations issued by respondents 2 and 3 in connection with the selection for appointment to the posts referred to by the petitioner in the writ petition. The requirement in terms of Ext.P9 as regards experience reads thus:

“One year experience in Production or Development or Quality Assurance in the relevant field from a recognized organization or undertaking.”

The requirement in terms of Ext.P10 as regards experience reads thus:

“One year's experience in Production or Development or Quality Assurance in the field of Electrical or Mechanical or Metallurgical or Industrial Production or Automobile from a recognized organization or undertaking.”

Ext.P2 certificate issued by the fourth respon