@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for Respondents 1 to 3.
2. The petitioner herein/Ex.Apprentices Association, Cordite Factory, Aruvankadu Branch and 10 others filed O.A.No.934 of 2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking direction to the 3rd respondent to formulate a Scheme as per Section 22 of the Apprentices Act, 1961, as amended by Act 29 of 2014. According to them, as per the provisions of the Apprentices Act, 1961, the 3rd respondent recruits ITI/Diploma qualified candidates enrolled in National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) in different trades from various institutions every year; the period of apprenticeship is one year; on completion of the Apprenticeship training, the apprentices are issued with a certificate for completion of training; the 3rd respondent has been offering employment to the apprentices whenever vacancy arises in various trades notwithstanding the rule under the Apprentices Act, 1961. The Government of India, taking note of large number of apprentices being jobless after completion of training in a particular establishment, thought it fit to amend the existing provision under Section 22 of the Act by Apprentices (Amendment) Act, 2014 (Act 29 of 2014) and accordingly an amendment has been made to Section 22 of the Act making it obligatory on the part of every employer to formulate or evolve a policy/scheme to recruit the apprentices who have completed the period of apprenticeship training in the establishment. By virtue of the amendment, a mandatory obligation has been imposed on the employer to formulate or evolve a policy or Scheme to recruit the apprentices who have completed the period of apprenticeship training in the establishment.
3. The contention of the petitioner/association is that the 3rd respondent being under the control of the respondents 1 and 2 is bound to frame a policy to recruit ex-apprentices in its establishment before going ahead with new recruitment in various trades for Group ''C'' posts as and when vacancies are arrived at. It is stated that in this connection, the Ministry of Railways has framed a policy in consonance with the amended provision. However, the 3rd respondent has not taken any steps to frame a scheme or amend the Recruitment Rules so as to include a provision for recruitment of ex-apprentices for Group ''C'' posts.
4. The grievance of the petitioner/association is that instead of formulating any scheme to amend the recruitment rules, the 3rd respondent issued a notification which has been published in the Employment News dated 14-20th March, 2015 calling for application from various trades in Group ''C'' and ''B'' posts. Further according to the petitioner association, most of the apprentices who are members of the 1st Applicant Association are fully qualified for the posts notified by the 3rd respondent and the notification states that Ex-trade apprentices of Ordinance Factories are also required to apply pursuant to the Advertisement.
5. In this connection, the petitioner/association submitted a representation on 18.04.2015 to the 2nd and 3rd respondent to consider the claim of the ex-apprentices for recruitment to Group ''C'' posts before considering the claim of outside candidates. However, no order was passed on the above representation. Hence the original application was filed before the Tribunal.
6. Having considered the claim of the petitioner association and also taking note of the developments taken place in other establishments, the Tribunal pointed out that as per Section 22(1) of the Apprentices Act, 1961, every employer shall formulate its own policy for recruiting any apprentice who has completed the period of apprenticeship training in its establishment. The Tribunal, further pointed out that the amendment came to be notified on 22.12.2014 and no scheme has been framed by the 3rd respondent for absorption of apprentices in regular posts yet and unless a Scheme is framed, the members of the petitioner association have no right to claim absorption in regular posts. Aggrieved by the said finding of the Tribunal, this Writ Petition is filed seeking direction to the 3rd respondent to frame a scheme for absorption of Ex-Apprentices who are members of the Petitioner Association.
7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner association and the learned Standing counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and perused the typed set of papers filed before this court.
8. On going through the averments made by the petitioner association and the findings of the Tribunal, we are of the considered view that the third respondent is required to formulate a Policy and frame a Scheme in tune with Section 22(1) of the Apprentices Act, 1961, for recruiting apprentices in regular posts from the apprentices, who have completed the period of apprenticeship training after carefully examining and following the implications such as, the period of training which the Ex-apprentices have undergone in the third respondent Factory, the cut off date of applications made by those apprentices for such post and thereafter, their selection has to be made based on merit, experience as well as by following the reservation rules and other conditions. After formulation of the necessary scheme, it is for the persons who have already undergone apprenticeship course to apply as per the notification issued by the third respondent. On such applications being filed, based on the apprentices fulfilling the eligibility criteria, their candidature for regular posts shall be considered by the 3rd respondent to fill up the vacancies whenever arises, keeping in view the rights of the other General candidates and the entire selection process shall go on in accordance with law.
9. With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected MP is closed.
