Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

1044
passed by the Supreme Court the State Government has issued an order directing the heads of all the
departments that the apprentice trainees shall be given preference. It has further been submitted that
the respondents have issued an advertisement inviting applications from the qualified candidates for
appointment on several posts of Junior Engineer including the Rural Engineering Services Department
but in the advertisement it has not been mentioned that the candidates who have completed apprentice
trainees shall be given preference. Although the petitioner has submitted his application in the prescribed
form for consideration on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) but the benefit of the apprentice training
is not being given to him.
Uttarakhand PSC
It has also been stated that the petitioner has submitted representations to the respondents to the
effect that the benefit of apprentice training is not being given to him but the same were un-replied.
Therefore, some of the trained diploma Engineers filed writ petition No.44 (S/B) 2002 before this
Court which was finally disposed of on 18.07.2003 with the direction to consider the claims of the
petitioner and decide his representation in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court.
In Writ Petition No.44 (S/B) 2003 the Division Bench of this Court has framed the following norms
in accordance with the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation
and another Vs U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs Berozgar Sangh and others (1995) 2 SCC (1) and
has directed for consideration of his representation:
“In the background of what has been noted above, we state that the following would be
kept in mind while dealing with the claim of the trainees to get employment after successful
completion of their training:
Other things being equal, a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct
recruits.
For this, a trainee would not be required to get his name sponsored by the employment
exchange. The decision of this Court in Union of India Vs Hargopal, AIR 1987 SC
1227, would permit this,
If age bar would come in the way of the trainee, the same would be relaxed in accordance,
with what is stated in this regard, if any, in the concerned service rule. If the service rule is
silent on this aspect, relaxation to the extent of the period for which the apprentice had
undergone training would be given.
The training institute concerned would maintain a list of the persons trained earlier would
be treated as senior to the persons trained later. In between the trained apprentice,
preference shall be given to those who are senior.”