Holding

Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act makes the employer bound to offer suitable employment to an apprentice when the apprenticeship contract contains a condition of post‑training service, and the phrase ‘without any commitment’ is to be read as creating reciprocal obligations, entitling the apprentices to be appointed to 50% of the vacancies.

Summary

The appellants, twenty‑two apprentices who completed a one‑year training with the Punjab State Electricity Board, claimed that their letters of appointment required the Board to absorb them in the event of vacancies, in line with a Government of India instruction that at least 50% of direct recruitment vacancies be filled by trained apprentices. The Board advertised fifty Junior Engineer‑II posts, and the apprentices sought appointment to half of these posts. The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the letters contained no enforceable guarantee and that reserving 50% of the posts for apprentices would breach reservation norms. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act, 1961, which overrides Section 22(1) when the apprenticeship contract includes a condition of post‑training service. The Court interpreted the clause “you shall be absorbed… without any commitment” as creating reciprocal obligations, obliging the employer to offer suitable employment if a vacancy exists. It held that the apprentices were entitled to be appointed to the stipulated 50% of the vacancies and that the Board’s refusal violated the statutory and contractual obligations. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and a writ directing the Board to absorb the apprentices was issued.

Issues considered

Whether paragraph 2 of the letters of appointment creates a binding condition obligating the employer to absorb apprentices if vacancies exist despite the phrase ‘without any commitment’.
Whether Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act, 1961 imposes a duty on the employer to offer suitable employment when the apprenticeship contract contains such a condition.
Whether the Government instruction to absorb at least 50% of direct recruitment vacancies by trained apprentices is enforceable in view of reservation requirements.
Whether the Executive Engineer had authority to incorporate the condition in the letters of appointment.

Legislation cited

Apprentices Act, 1961s. 22(1), s. 22(2)

Subjects

apprenticeshipemployment guaranteecontract interpretationSection 22reservationgovernment instructionlabour law

Judgment

A NARENbER KUMAR AND ORS.

v.

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

29th November, 1984
•
B
[Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, C.J., AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, J.]

Apprentices Act (Act-Lll of 1961), Section 22(2), object and scope of-
Contract of apprenticeship-Interpretation of Para 2 of the contract of
Apprenticeship-Whether the terms of the contract entitle the trained
apprentices to be appo;nred to 50% of the posts as per Government of India,
Department of Labour (D.G.E.T.) Instructions notified on March 23rd, 1983-
Words and Phrases, meaning of ''without commitment''.

Jn accordance with the provisions of the Apprentices Act, J961 and in
terms of Para 2 of the contract of apprenticeship the appellants completed
a one year apprenticeship under respondent No. 2, Punjab State Electricity
Board. Contrary to the Instructions, notified on March 23rd, 1983 and
D issued by of the Ministry of Labour and Rehabilitation, Department of
Labour (D.G.E.T.) Government of India to all officers asking them to take
necessary action to ensure that the trained apprentices are absorbed in
industries upto a minimum of 50 per cent of direct recruitment vacancies,
the Board advertised on July 27, 19.83 50 posts of Junior Engineers-II
(Electrical) in its establishment for which the appellants had successfully
completed a one year apprenticeship under it.
E
The appellants, therefore, filed a writ petition in the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana, challenging the issuance of the advertisement on the
ground that under their respective letters of appointment, they were entitled
to be appointed to 50 per cent of posts which \\·ere advertised by respordent
No. 2. The writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on the ground
that the letters of appointment issued to the appellant did not contain any
F assurance or undertaking that they wiJl be absorbed in the service of the
Punjab State Electricity Board ; that 47 per cent of the vacancies were
already reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, backward classes,
ex.servicemen, etc., and that, if another 50 per cent of the posts were to be
reserved for apprenticeship ti·ainees, a1most 100 per cent posts shall have
been put in the reserved category which would be contrary to law. Hence
the appeal by special leave
G
Allowing the appeal, the Court,

HELD. 1. The object of Section 22(21 oi the Apprentice Act 1961 is to
guarantee to the extent of Lhe existance of vacancies that the apprentices will
H not be rendtred Jobless after they complete their training.
NAREJ.iollR KUMAR v. PUNJAB 1S3
2.1. Sub-section (2) of section 22 leaves no doubt that, despite the A
provision contained in sub~section (1), the e.nployer is under an obligation
to offer suitable employment to the apprentice if the contract of apprenticC4
ship contains a condition that the apprentice shall serve the employer after
the successful completion of the training. Indeed, when such an offer is
made the apprentice on' his part is' bound to serve the employer in the
capacity in which he was working as an apprentice, In a contract of
apprenticeship, if a condition is not happily expre:,sed the Court must take B
a broad and commonsense view of the terms of the employment. It in not
• proper in such cases to indulge in a hair-splitting approach and find an
escape for defeating the rights of employees. [155 F-G]

2.2. Paragraph 2 of the letters of appointment is intended to convey
the meaning that there is an obligation on the apprentices to serve the
'
'
J
. employer after the successful completion of the training. When paragraph
2 says that the apprentice "shalJ be absorbed in the department" the only
reasonable interpretation to put upon that expression is that it creates
reciprocal rights and obligations on the parties to the contract of apprentice~
c

ship, nacnely, the employee and the employer. ''You shall be absorbed" is
a double-edged term of the contract. lt binds the employer to offer
employment to the apprentice (if there is a vacancy) and, equa1ly, it binds
the apprentice to accept the offer. [156 D·F] D
2.3. Ia the context in which the expression "without any commit-
ment" occurs, it only means that the obligation of the employer to offer
err1ployment to the apprentice and the corresponding obligation of the
apprentice to serve the employer arises only if and when there is a vacany
in which the apprentice can be appointed. Paragraph 2 of the letters of
appointment creates a binding obligation upon the employer to absorb the
apprentices in the department on the successful completion of the training E
period, provided there is a vacancy in which the apprentices can be
appoint¢. H would be contrrry both to the letter and spirit of paragraph
2 of the letters of appointment to hold that even if there is a vacancy in
which an appren tiec can be appointed after the successful completion of his
training, the employer is free not to appoint the apprentice and fill that vacan..
, ' cy by appointing an outsider, Such a reading of the assurance contained in
; paragraph 2 wiJI also frustrate the very object of the provision made by the F
legislature in section 22(2) of the apprentice Act. [157 B; E-F]

3. The contention that the Executiv~ Engineer, who sent the letters
of appointment, had no authority to incorporate the particular condition in
those letters cannot be accepted in as much as a senior officer in the
position of an Executive Engineer would not incorporate a specific term in
the contract of apprenticeship without being authorised to do so. [156 ·G-H]
G

4. In the instant case, offering employment to the appellants to the
extent of 50 per cent of the posts will not violate the law, as laid down by
this Court, in regard to reservation of posts. The appellants are·-entitled to
be appointed in the available vacaq~ies not because of CJ.Q.y resc;.-vation of
posts in their favour but because of the provisions of oection 22(2) of iho
ff
154 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1985] i s.c,t\.
Apprertices Act and the contractual obligations arising under paragraph 2
A
of the letters of appointment. [157 H; 158 A]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4720 of
1984.

B
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated ..
+
.
the 24th November, 1983 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
C.W.P. No. 4839 of 1983. •
V.M. 1'arkande and A.K. Goel, for the Appellant.

Ashwani Kumar and A.K. Panda for the Respondents.
c The Judgment CJf the Court was delivered by

CHANDRACHUD, C.J. The appellants 22 in number, who hold a
three-year Diploma in Electrical Engineering Course from the State
Board of Technical Education, Punjab, were appointed as apprentices
in August 1981..The Principal, Technical Training Institute, Punjab
D State Electricity Board, Patiala, who is respondent 3 herein, issued
the requisite certificates to the appellants on successful completion
by them of one year's apprenticeship. After obtaining those certi-
ficates the appellants registered their names with the Employment
Exchanges in Punjab. The Ministry of Labour and Rehabilitation,
E Department of Labour (D.G.E.T.), Government of India, New
Delhi, issued instructions to various offi1es including the Punjab
State Electricity Board, Patiala, respondent 2 herein, asking that
necessary action should be taken to ensure that the trained appren-
tices are absorbed in industries upto a minimum of 50 per cent of
direct recruitment vacancies. These instructions were notified on
F March 23, 1983. On July 27, 1983, respondent 2 advertised 50
posts of Junior Engineers-II (Electrical) in its establishment, fcx
which the appellant had successfully completed a one-year appren-
ticeship.
•
The appellants filed a writ petition (No. 4839 of 1983) in the
G High Court of Punjab and Haryana, challenging the issuance of the
advertisement on the ground that, under their respective latters of
appointme.nt, . they were entitled to be appointed to 50 per cent of
the posts which were advertised by respondent 2. That writ peti-
tion was dismissed by the High Court on the ground that the letters
of appointment issued to the appellants did not contain any assu-
B.
NARENDER KUMAR v. PUNJAB (Chandrachud C.J.) is5
ranee or undertaking that they will be absorbed in the service of the A
Punjab State Electricity Board ; that 47 per cent of the vacancies
were already reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes,
backward classes, ex-service men, etc. ; and that, if another 50 per
cent of the posts were to be reserved for apprenticeship trainees,
• almost JOO per cent posts shall have been put in the resarved cate-
gory which would be contrary to law. This appeal by special leave B
is directed against the judgment of the High Court.

Section 22(1) of the Apprentices Act, 52 of 1961, provides that
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 nor shall it be obligatory c
.... on the part of the apprentice to accept an employment under the
.1 employer. This provision is, however, subject to the non-obstante
clause in sub-section (2) of section 22 which reads as follows :

"Notwithstanding anything in sub-section (I), where
there is a condition in a contract of apprenticeship that the D
apprentice shall, after the successful completion of the
apprenticeship training, serve the employer, the employer
shall, on such completion, be bound to offer suitable em-
ployment to the apprentice, and the apprentice shall be
bound to serve the employer in that capacity for such
period and on such remuneration as may be specified in the
E
contract".

(The proviso to this sub-section is not relevant for our pur-
pose).
••
' This sub-section leaves no doubt that, despite the provIS10n F
contained in sub-section(!), the employer is under an obligation to
offer suitable employment to the apprentice if the contract of
apprenticeship contains a condition that the apprentice shall serve
the employer after the successful completion of the training. Indeed,
when such an offer is made, the apprentice on his part is bound to
serve the employer in the capacity in which he was working as an G
apprentice.

The question which, therefore, arises for consideration is whe-
ther there is a condition in the contract of apprenticeship of the
papellants that they. shall serve \he employer after the successful H ,,
SUPREME COURT REPORts [1985] i s.c.il
A completion of their apprenticeship training. In this behalf, Para-
graph 2 of the letters of appointment under which the appellants
were appointed as apprentices is important. It reads thus :

"+ .
"It should be clearly understood that you shall be on
stipendary training for a period of one year and on suc-
B cessful completion of this training, you shall be absorbed
in the department if there are vacancies, without any com-
mitment subject to the stipulation that during the waiting
period after one year's apprenticeship, you will not be paid
any remuneration".

c It is urged on behalf of the respondents that, this particular
term iu the contract of apprenticeship cannot be construed as a • j

condition that the apprentices shall, after the successful completion ).

of their apprenticeship training, serve the employer. We find it
difficult to accept this submission. Paragraph 2 of the l~tters of
appointment is intended to convey the meaning that there is an obli-
D gation on the apprentices to serve the employer after the successful
completion of the training. This condition is not happjly expressed
but, in matters such as the one before us, one must take a broad .
and commonsense view of the terms of employment. It is not pro-
per in such cases to indulge in a hair-splitting approach and find an
escape for defeating the rights of employess. When paragraph 2
says that the apprentice "shall be absorbed in the department", the
E only reasonable interpretation to put upon that expression is that it
creates reciprocal rights and obligation of the parties to the contract
of apprenticeship, namely, the employee and the employer. "You
shall be absorbed" is a double-edged term of the contract. It binds
the employer to offer employment to the apprentice (if there is a
F vacancy) and, equally, it binds the apprentice to accept the offer.

Indeed, that is why, instead of advancing the argument which
was made before us, the stand taken by the State of Punjab in the •
High Court was that the Executive Engineer, who sent the letters of
appointment, had no authority to incorporate the particular condi-
G tion in those letters. That contention is wholly without substance and
in any event, remains unsubstantiated. It is quite difficult to accept
that a senior officer in the position of an Executive would incorporate
a specific term in the contract of apprenticeship without being
autho~ised to do so.

B· "' · That is also wJ\.y yet anothet det'ence "M taken. by the State of
·/
/
NA RENDER KUMAR v. pUN1AB ( Chandrachud C.J.) . ·/157
·/:
Punjab to the contention of the appellants. That d<:fence was that A.
tl.t.wortls "ivithout any commitment" which occurs in paragraph 2
of the. letters of appointment, show that there is no obligation on
th, part of the employer to employ the apprentices after their period
of training is over. There is no substance in that contention also
because, in the context in which the expression "without any com-
mitment" occurs, it only means that the obligation of the employer
B
to offer employment to the apprentice and the corresponding obliga-
tion of the apprentice to serve tbe employer arises only if and when
there is a vacancy in which the apprentice can be appointed .. This
is made clear by the clause, "you shall be absorbed in the depart-
ment if there are vacancies', which precedes the expression "without
any commitment". This is plain commonsense because, if there is
no vacancy in which an apprentice can be appointed, there can be c
no obligation to appoint him and there can, evidently, be no obli-
( gation upon .the apprentice to serve the employer. These reciprocal
rights and obligations, namely, to serve and offer employment, arise
on the occurrence of a vacancy in which an apprentice can be
appointed.
D
We are also of the opinion that, apart from the implications
arising out of Section 22{2l of the Apprentices Act, paragraph 2 of
the letters of appointment creates a binding obligation upon the
employer to absorb the apprentices in the department on the success-
ful completion of the training period, provided there is a vacancy
in which the apprentices can be appointed. It would be contrary E
both to the letter and spirit of paragraph 2 of the letters of appoint-
ment to hold, that, even if there is a vacancy in which an apprentice
can be appointed after the successful completion of his training, the
employer is free not to appoint the apprentice and fill that ·vacancy
by appointing an outsider. Such a reading of the assurance con-
tained in paragraph 2 will also frustrate the very object of the F
provision made by the legislature in Section · 22 12) of the Act. The
object of that provision is to guarantee, to the extent of the existence
of vacancies, that the apprentices will not be rendered jobless after
they complete their training.
G
No other point was argued before us on behalf of the respon-
dents. We would, however, like to indicate that there is no
substance in the contention taken by the respondents before the
High Court that offering employment to the appellants to the extent
of 50 per cent of the posts will violate the law, as laid down by this
Court, in regard to reservation of posts. The appellants are entitled H
158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1985] 2 s.c.R.
~-·
A to be appointed in the available vacancies not because of any reser-
vation of po~ts in their favour but because of the provisions of
Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act and the contractual obligations
arising under paragraph 2 of the letters of appointment.

B For these reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the judg-
ment of the High Court. A writ shall issue directing the respondents
to absorb the appellants as Junior Engineers - II (Electrical) in the
22 vacancies which will form a part of the fifty vacancies which are
advertised by respondent 2, the Punjab State Electricity Board,
Patiala. The appellants will get their costs here and in the High
c Court, which we quantify at rupees five thousand in all.
• l

S.R. Appeal allowed

•