Hon'ble Anil Kumar, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Mohd. A. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners have completed their apprenticeship Training of Tubewell Mistri under the administrative control of Superintendent Engineer, Tubewell Circle, Potarganj/Irrigation Department, Gonda.
(2.) IN view of the said background, the present writ petition has been filed by opposite parties thereby directing the official respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Tubewell Mistri as he has completed the apprenticeship training from the department in question in order to above said relief. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court dated 20.121999 passed in Writ Petition No.3083 of 1998 Daya Nand and others vs. The State of U.P. and others which has been passed taken in to consideration the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport and another vs. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishusu Berozgar Sangh and others ( : 1995) 1 UPLBEC 320.
(3.) FURTHER an order dated 20.12.1999 passed in Writ Petition No. 3083 of 1998 Daya Nand and others vs. The State of U.P.w and others, is re -produced herein under: - The only grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that they may be considered giving them a preferential treatment as provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Judgment reported in ( : 1995) 1 UPLBEC 320, U. P. State Road Transport and another vs. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishusu Berozgar Sangh and others. In the above judgment the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to provide the guideline in paras 12 and 13 of the judgment which reads as under: Para 12 -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 trainees to get employment after successful completion of their training. (1) Other thing beings equal, a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct recruits. (2) For this, a trainees would not be required to get his name sponsored by any employment exchange. The decision of this Court in Union of India vs. Hargopal, : AIR 1987 SC 1227, would permit this. (3) 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 be silent on this aspect, relaxation to the extent of the period for which the apprentice had undergone training would be given. (4) The concerned training institute would maintain a list of the persons trained year -wise. The persons trained earlier would be treated as senior to the persons trained later. In between the trained apprentices, preference shall be given to those who are senior. Para 13 -In so far as the cases at hand are concerned we find that the Corporation filed an additional affidavit in C.A. Nos. 4347 -4354 of 1990 (as desired by the Court) on 20th October, 1992 giving position regarding vacancies in the posts of conductors and clerks. If such posts be still vacant, we direct the Corporation to act in accordance with what has been stated above regarding the entitlement of the trainees. We make it clear that while considering the cases of the trainees for giving employment in suitable posts what has been laid down in the Service Regulations of the Corporation shall be followed, except that the trainees would not be required to appear in any written examination, if any provided by the Regulations. It is apparent that before considering the cases of the trainees, the requirement of their names being sponsored by the employment exchange would not be insisted upon. In so far as the age requirement is concerned, the same shall be relaxed as indicated above. The writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction that the authorities while making recruitment will consider the petitioners also giving them the relaxation quoted above given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.;