(D f.«tt..^"»&' ^. J^01 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR WMT APPEAL N0. 133 OF 2009 (Arising out oforder dated 9.4.09 passed by the Single Bench ofthis Hon'ble Court, Hon'ble Justice Shri Dhirendra Mishra in W.P. No. 38 of 2009 ) APPELLAN3? PETITIONER? ^^.-.^ ^-ci*n v-i ?te"2 yy' / 1. Jeevendra Prasad Tiwari S/o. Shri Jagdish Prasad Tiwari, aged about 35 years, R/o. Village & Post Mangawan, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) South eastem coalfields Ltd., Hasdeo Area, Sub Area Bijuri,District Sarguja (NowKorea)(CG). Shiv Kumar Patel, S/o. Shri Ram Pratgap Patel, aged about 35 years, R/o. Village & Post Mangawan, Distt. Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Chirimiri Area, District Korea (CG) ^ Indra Lal Patel, S/o. Shri Ram Sumirrran Patel, aged about 36 years, R/o. Village Chaagava Post Purba, Ditt. Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Chirimiri Area, Distt. Korea (CG). Narendra Kumar Patel, S/o. Shri Budhsen Patel, aged about 36 years, R/ovulate & Post Umari, PS. Raipur, Distt.Rewa (MP) Ex. ITII Apprentice (Fitter) SECL, Chirimiri Area, Distt.Korea (CG). ^5. Rajesh Prasad Soni, S/o. Shir Girish Prasad Soni, aged about 40 yeais, R/o. Village Chandeh Post Dubgawan, PS Mangavan, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Weldei) SECL Chirimiri Area, Distt. Korea (CG). , 6. -VanshPati Patel, S/o. Shri Ram Kumar Patel, aged about 34 year, RVo. Village Parsa, Post Umiri, PS Mangavan, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Hasdeo Area District Korea (CG). 7. Rajes Tiwari, S/o. Shri S.N. Tiwai, aged about 34 yars, R/o. village & Post Palah, P.S. Lor District REwa (MP) E^. ITI Apprentice (Fitter) SECL, Hasdeo Area, District Korea. -'.^ SS??;-T:^WL?^^7'r^£2¥^:s7--;j- !.' . • . 1- •^-"^s^^i^i^^^ t3 ^i;;"-:.';:::?:^^" !|!«"i6i /8. Vishnukant Patel, S/o. Shri Rameshwar Prasad Patel, aged about 34 years, R/o. Village and post Devangan Via Mangavan Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Hasdeo Area, District Korea. Krishna Nand Sharma, S/o. Shri Ram Milan Sharm, aged about 33 years, R/o. Village Bharjodpur, Post Devangan, P.S. Mangavan District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electi-ician) SECL Hasdeo Area, District Korea. ,.10. Shiikant Shamia, S/o. Shri Triveni ^ Sharma, aged about 34 years, R/o. Village Marzadpur Post Devgavan, P1S. Mangavan, District REwa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Hasdeo Area, District Korea. Bhupendra Singh, S/o. Shri Dal Pratap Singh, aged about 34 years, R/o. Village & Post Belva Peakan, P.S. Mangavn, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Electrician) SECL Hasdeo Area, District Korea. •12. Namchandra Dubey, S/o. Shri Shambu Prasad Dubey, aged about 36 yars, R/o. Village and Post Devgavan Via Mangavan, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Fitter) SECL Chirimiri Area, District Korea. ^ 13. Hetlal Singh, S/o. Shri Ajayab Lal Singh, aged about 37 years, R/o. Village Khamaria Post Audva PS Panwar, District Rewa (MP) Ex. ITI Apprentice (Fitter) SECL Raigarh Area, District Raigarh (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS Coal India Limited, 10, Netaji Subhash Road, Kolkata (W.B.) Through its Chairman. South Eastem Coalfields Ltd,. Seepat Road, Bialspur (C.G.) Through : Its Chairman-cum-Managing Director. rt< m Q) 3. Director (Personnel) SouthEastem Coalfields Ltd., Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG) 4. Dy. ChiefPersonnelManager '' (Labour) South Eastem Coalfields Ltd., Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG) WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2 (1) OF THE CHHATISGARH HIGH CQURT (APPEAL TO THE DIVISION BENCH) ACT, 2006. ... 7::?< s i 3 . ; g !S;. y,4 !!U .s K- ^ ,vi HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR D. B: Hon'ble Shri I.M. Ouddusi. Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, Appellant; Respondents Writ Aopeal No.139/2009 Jeevendra Prasad Tiwari Vs. Coal India Ltd., and others Appellanl: Respondents Writ Appeal No.140/2009 Tejmani Patel Vs. Coal Indla Ltd., and others WritADpeal No.168/2009 Appellantss Resoondents Rakesh Kumar Gupta & others Vs. Coal India Ltd., and others ^^y:^s'-^^^' Appellants: Respondents Writ Appeal No.169/2009 r Mani Pratap Singh and others Vs. Coal India Ltd., and others WritApoeal No.302/2009 Appellants; Respondents VinodKumar Singh & others Vs. Coat India Ltd., and others Appellants; Respondents Writ Appeal No.304/2009 Naresh Kumar Chandra & others Vs. • Coal India Ltd., and others '<!<s'&,i -If ApDellantr; R«»pondents WritAppeal No.340/2009 Nagendra Bahadur Slngh & others Vs. Coal Indla Ltd., and others Appearance: Mr. Sanjay Verma wlth Rajesh Chand, counsel for the appellants. Mr. P. S. Koshy with Mr. Vivek Verma, counsel for the respondents. ..^ v"!" Writ Appeals under Section 2 fll of the Chhattisaarh Hiah Court fAppeal to Division Benchl Act. 2006 ORAL ORDER (29.04.2010) PerI.M.OUDDUSI.J Heard. 2. These wrlt appeals have been filed against the Impugned orders dated 09.04.2009 & 03.07.2009 passed by the learned SingleJudge in W.P(S). Nos. 38/2009,, 975/2009, 752/2009, 1108/2009, 1061/2009 and W.P.(S). No.3097/2009 , dismissing the said writ petitions. Since the grievances raised by the appellants inall the writ appeals are one and the same, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. 3. The brlef facts of the case are as follows: (i) The writ appellants have undergone apprenticeship training under the Apprentlces Act, 1961 in the establishment of the respondents between 1996 and 1998. Thereafter, they were deputed on different collleries of the respondent South Eastern Coal Relds. They had sought thelr \•^ in'111151llB!]'i'n^!]i.i— ^^ -ll i^S't.^','" •ij^.•^'ile"^^^^^^ '^T^f^'^s^^^ absorption on the post of General Mazdoor Category- I and for that purpose they had eartier filed W.P. No.1357/2002, which was disposed of vide order dated 08.11.2005 with a directlon to the respondents to consider the case of appellants/petitioners for absorption and regularization on the post of General Majdoor Category-I immediately after the ban imposed vide order dated 28th July, 2000 issued by the Ministry of Coal, is llfted. It was further dlrected to the respondents to take steps to get the relaxation from ban for appointment of the petitioners on the above stated posts and the petitioners may be entitled to proficiency certiflcates, if permissible. (ii) However, against the order dated 08.11.2005 passed by the learned Single 3udge, the Central Coal Fields Llmited preferred Civil Appeal No.1714/2007 before the Supreme Court, which was dlsposed of on 29.03.2007 holding that "when an apprentice undergoes training, there is no obligation for the Management to glve him employment/ absorption in the establishment, therefore, the dlrection given by the learned singte Judge is totSlly wrong and llable to be set aslde. However, in case the vacancies are advertised for regular appointment and everything belng equal, then preference may be glven to the candidates who have been trained by this establishment because they have undergone training in this establlshment and have legitimate expectation. While setting aside the impugned order dated 08.11.2005, It was further held by the Supreme Court that if the incumbents have already successfutly completed the training, there is no reason to wfthhold their profldency ce.rtificates" Section 21 of the Apprentices Act, 1961 provldes for holding of test and grant of certlflcate and conclusion of w'ys y€^. -l^ .1**- '•.:^^.^^ ^i .^-•a, @ ^ •^-^. training. It further provides that after completion of the perlod of training, the apprentice shall appear for a test to be conducted by the National Council to determlne his proflciency in the designated trade, on which, he has undergone his apprenticeship training and every trade apprentice who passes the test shall be granted a certjflcate of profidency in the trade by the national Council and the progress in apprentfceship training of every graduate or technidan (vocational) apprentice shall be assessed by the employer from time to time. 5. Learned counsel for the appeltants submlts that the appellants have not been referred to the National Council forappearance in test. He further submits that due to non-availability of proflciency certiflcates, they could not apply in any other establishment and thus they were deprived of making any application in any other estabtishment. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submlts that the acivertisements for appointment was not issued in the intervening period due to imposition of ban on such appointments, therefore, the entire recruitment was banned by the Central Government and after lifting the ban, permission was sought to issue the advertisement. However, in the meantime, the writ appellants became over age. 8— 1-3 -Wy 7. The respondent/S.E.C.L. on appellants' moving apptications for age relaxation, strongly recommended for relaxation In upper age limit for appointment of Class-III trade apprentice on the post of General Mazdoor, but the same was dedined on 16.10.2008 by respondent Coal Indla Limited. Again the cases of the applfcants were recommended by the respondent SECL vide memo dated 07.01.2009, which was also rejected by the Coal India Limited, by order dated 09.01.2009. 8. The following relief(s) were sought by the appellants In the Writ Petitions vide para 10. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be .pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to appoint any candidate on the post of General Mazdoor Category-I in the SECL pursuant to the select list published in the tocal newspaper "Nav Bharat", Bllaspur, dated 17.12.2008 & 21.12.2008. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a wrlt of mandamus commanding the respondents to Issye select llst for appointments on the post of General Majdoor Category-I in the SECL strictly in accordance with the directives, observations and guidelines as issued by the Hon'ble Court. 10.4 This Honourable Court may kindly be pleased to further direct the respondents to take steps with regard to Issuance. of the Profidency Certiflcate as per the provisions of Sectlon 231 oftheActofl961. ^.ffSSt^ F'li1 •ssr'SfS'? 9. With regard to rellef sought for issuance of dlrection restraining the respondents from appolnting any candidate on the post of General Mazdoor Category-I in the SECL, it has to be mentioned that notice intimating the candidates to appear in the written examination was issued and thereafter they appeared In the written examination and acting upon the select Ifsts, the successful candidates were given appointments. Therefore, thls relief has become infructuous, at thls stage. 10. With regard to relief sought for issuance of direction to take steps for granting proflciency certificates as provided jn section 21 of the Apprentices Act, 1961, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already observed that when the incumbents have completed their training, there !s no reason to withhold the proficiency certificates. It appears that in the instant case, the incumbents have not been referred to the National Council inspite of representations made by the appellants to that effect. Therefore, we direct that the appellants' names shall be referred to the National Council along-with their particulars for giving a chance to appear in the test so that they may get proficiency certificates after getting successful in the test. The National Council shall consider the same as early as possible preferably within period of 3 months from the date of productlon of a copy of this order. A copy of this order shall be produced by the writ appellants before the concerned respondents along-with all particulars. 11. y^esi :':i;'^'^ Rso 12. ^s. With regard to age relaxation, we feel that no relief was claimed by the writ appellants in the writ petition for relaxation of their age. However, since their names were not referred to National Council for appearing in the proflciency test as also the entire recruitment was banned t^ by the Central Government on such appoint»i«ilifor a particular period and permisslon was sought to Issue the advertisement after lifting the ban and in the meantime, the appellants became over age, we feel that in case the appellants approach respondent authorlties for their age relaxation, the same shall be considered sympathetically keeping in view that they had already undergone apprenticeship training but have been deprived of getting proficiency certificates and also the fact that there was imposition of ban on such appointments, due to which, the appellants became over age. Further the appetlants shall also be considered for appointment to the post of General Mazdoor Category-I in accordance with taw. With the above directlon, the writ appeals are disposed of. The impugned order dated 09.04.2009 and 03.07.2009 passed by the learned singte judges shall stand modified to the extent tndicated above. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd//- prashantKumarMishra Judge ^;% I^E; IBS 'iR-riT-mr-r