1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7804/2007 Kishor Singh v. A.V.V.N.Ltd., Ajmer & Ors. Date of Order :: 17 th December, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. S.P.Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Bhansali, for the respondents. .... The Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Ajmer under an advertisement dated 18.11.2006 invited applications from eligible desirous candidates to be considered for appointment to the post of Technical Helper (Electrician and Wiremen) against the existing 624 vacancies. As per the advertisement the maximum age limit for an incumbent desirous to be considered for appointment as Technical Helper should not be above the age of 28 years on 1.1.2007. A relaxation in maximum age limit is allowed to the persons undergoing apprenticeship training with the concerned electric company. The petitioner acquired apprentice training course with Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Limited from 10.4.1999 to 9.4.2002 and by this petition for writ he is claiming a direction for the respondents to include the period aforesaid with his age and to grant age relaxation in the maximum age limit. The only argument advanced by counsel for the petitioner is that as per the advertisement itself 2 the relaxation in the maximum age limit, equivalent to the term the petitioner has undergone apprenticeship training is required to be given. He has also placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. v. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs Berozgar Sangh & Ors., reported in (1995)2 SCC 1, holding therein that if age bar would come in the way of trainee, the same would be relaxed in accordance with the provisions of the service rules and if service rules are silent then relaxation to the extent of period for which the apprentice had undergone training would be given. Per contra, the stand of the respondents is that the relaxation as claimed by the petitioner is available only to the apprentices who have acquired training from Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited only. Such relaxation is not available for undergoing training with any other company except the Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner is claiming relaxation on basis of the condition referred in the advertisement and on basis of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (supra). As per the condition referred in 3 advertisement the relaxation is available only to the employees working with the company concerned and in the instant matter that is Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited. The petitioner has acquired apprenticeship training from Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Limited and admittedly that is a different company, hence the relaxation clause is not applicable in present case. So far as the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (supra) is concerned, that too is of no assistance for the petitioner. In the case aforesaid certain guidelines are given to keep in mind while dealing with the claim of trainees to get employment. It prescribes that some relaxation is required to be given in maximum age limit to the apprentices. Such instruction has been adhered by the respondent company by giving relaxation in maximum age limit to the apprentices who have acquired training with it. The instructions given by Hon'ble Supreme court in no manner can be extended for grant of relaxation in maximum age limit even for the persons who have acquired training from some other company/institution. As such, the petition for writ is having no merit and, therefore, the same is dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.