Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

No Mandatory Employment Post-Apprenticeship: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal verdict, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ruled against the mandatory employment of apprentices after their apprenticeship period, under Section 22 of the Apprenticeship Act, 1961. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal on November 21, 2023, has far-reaching implications for apprenticeship programs and the rights of apprentices seeking employment.

The court’s decision stemmed from a series of cases where individuals who had completed their apprenticeship training sought employment with their respective employers. The petitioners argued that, based on their apprenticeship, they should be granted employment as per the Apprenticeship Act.

However, the court firmly held that there is no obligatory requirement on the part of the employer to offer employment to apprentices after the completion of their apprenticeship training. Quoting Section 22 of the Apprenticeship Act, the judgment stated, “It shall not be obligatory on the part of the employer to offer any employment to any apprentice who has completed the period of his apprenticeship training in his establishment.”

Additionally, the court emphasized the importance of timely legal action, highlighting that the petitioners had waited for approximately 13 years before seeking a legal remedy. In line with previous legal precedents, the court cited cases such as Eastern Coalfields Ltd. V. Dugal Kumar, stating that “Inordinate delay in making the motion for a writ is indeed an adequate ground for refusing to exercise discretion in favor of the applicant.”

The ruling reaffirms the principle that the courts may take into account delay and laches when considering petitions, even in cases involving alleged violations of fundamental rights. The judgment quoted the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. T.T. Murali Babu case, emphasizing that “delay comes in the way of equity” and that petitioners should approach the court promptly.

In conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision clarifies the legal obligations of employers regarding apprenticeship programs and underscores the importance of timely legal action when seeking remedies. This judgment serves as a precedent for future cases involving apprenticeship rights and obligations, providing clarity on the legal framework surrounding apprenticeship employment.

Date of Decision 21.11.2023

KAMALJIT SINGH  VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Latest Legal News