Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Friday, Feb 09, 2007
ePaper


News
Features
Stocks
Cross Currency
Shipping
Archives
Google

Group Sites

Corporate - Courts/Legal Issues
Industry & Economy - Employment
States - Tamil Nadu
Apprentices have no right to seek preference in jobs over others: HC

Our Legal Correspondent

Advertisement
Bharat Matrimony

Chennai Feb. 8 Apprentice trainees had no right to seek job in preference to other applicants, the Madras High Court has ruled.

Citing a ruling of the Supreme Court on October 3, 1996, the First Bench held that apprentices/trainees should have to go through process of selection provided under service regulations/rules.

In the writ appeal by Mr K. Venkadesan, Secretary, Neyveli Lignite ITI Apprentice Welfare Association, challenging the order of the single judge holding that persons who had undergone training in trade apprenticeship in Neyveli Lignite Corporation were eligible to participate in selection subject to fulfilling other conditions, the Bench, comprising Chief Justice Mr A.P. Shah and Mr Justice K. Chandru said that reliance placed upon circular dated April 21, 1983 of the Central Government was misconceived.

According to the appellant, members of the association had undergone ITI course and they were all trained apprentices and should be given preference over others who had worked as apprentices in NLC.

The single judge ruled that NLC would take care of the trained persons keeping in view statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements. He therefore dismissed the petition.

The Bench referred to the judgment of apex court holding that apprentices should have to go through process of selection under service rules and said that it would be necessary for them to accept selection where viva voce test was also provided.

The apex court had clearly laid down that apprentice-trainees had no right to be appointed in preference to other applicants. The argument based upon any preferential claim was also rejected by the Supreme Court and hence, the appellant could not urge the same point before this Court. In view of this, the writ appeal failed and the same shall stand dismissed.

More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | Employment | Tamil Nadu

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page



Stories in this Section
Sandvik Asia to set up new R&D centre in Pune


Braun R&D facility at Mahindra World
BMW announces `3-series' prices
Cotton County opts for SAP tool
Bharti complains to DoT against BSNL
BHEL bags Rs 400-cr hydel contract in Himachal
ABB India bags Rs 311-cr order
Jupiter Bio gets order from Swiss co
PSL bags Rs 240-cr order from L&T
Apprentices have no right to seek preference in jobs over others: HC
`Retention of talent a big challenge during M&As'
Mecon revamp package okayed
Rain Calcining to merge with Rain Commodities
ABN Amro tops advisory league table
M&As test the mettle of steel industry
Supreme Yarns plans to expand capacity
Suguna Poultry forays into layer segment
Albit Electronics plans expansion
Swiss cookware co's expansion drive
Feeding a car project... and their personal dreams
Reliance gets approval for oil production in K-G basin
L&T, Boeing sign MoU
Apollo Sindhoori's gambit to expand volumes
Pfizer may outsource application maintenance
Bogun new SkodaIndia sales MD


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line