DISPUTE BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND APPRENTICE MUST BE SETTLED BY APPRENTICESHIP ADVISER

[Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN]

 

                 Apprenticeship Act, 1961 was enacted to provide for the regulation and control of training of apprentices and for matters connected therewith.   An apprentice is a person who is undergoing apprenticeship training in pursuance of a contract of apprenticeship.  Apprenticeship training is defined under Sec. 2(aaa) of the Act as a course of training in any industry or establishment undergone in pursuance of a contract of apprenticeship and under prescribed terms and conditions which may be different categories of apprentices. 

                To undergo apprenticeship training Sec. 4 prescribes the contract of apprenticeship.  Sec. 6 deals with the period of training.  The apprentice agreement is to be registered with the Apprenticeship Adviser.  The Apprenticeship Adviser shall not register a contract unless he is satisfied that the person described as an apprentice in the contract is qualified under this Act for being engaged as an apprentice to undergo apprenticeship training in the designated trade specified in the contract.

               Sec. 7 provides the termination of apprenticeship contract.  The contract of apprenticeship shall terminate on the expiry of the period of training.  Either party to a contract may make an application to the Apprenticeship Adviser for the termination of the contract, and when such application is made, shall send by post a copy thereof to the other party to the contract.   After considering the contents of the application and the objections, if any, filed by the other party, the Apprenticeship Adviser may, by order in writing, terminate the contract.   If he is satisfied that the parties to the contract or any of them have or has failed to carry out the terms and conditions of the contract and it is desirable in the interests of the parties or any of them to terminate the same.  Where a contract is terminated for failure on the part of the employer to carry out the terms and conditions of the contract, the employer shall pay to the apprenticeship such compensation as may be prescribed.   Where a contract is terminated for such failure on the part of the apprentice, the apprentice or his guardian shall refund to the employer as cost of training such amount as may be determined by the Apprenticeship Adviser.  Where a contract of apprenticeship has been terminated by the Apprenticeship Adviser before the expiry of the period of apprenticeship training and a new contract of apprenticeship is being entered into with a new employer, the Apprenticeship Adviser may, if he is satisfied that the contract of apprenticeship with the previous employer could not be completed because of any lapse on the part of the previous employer, permit the period of apprenticeship training already undergone by the apprenticeship with the previous employer to be included in the period of apprenticeship training to be undertaken with the new employer.

             Sec. 20 of the Act provides that any disagreement or dispute between an employer and an apprentice arising out of the contract of apprenticeship shall be referred to the Apprenticeship Adviser for decision.   Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Apprenticeship Adviser within thirty days from the date of communication to him of such decision, prefer an appeal against the decision to the Apprenticeship Council and such appeal shall be heard and determined by a Committee of that Council appointed for the purpose.  The decision of the Committee and subject only to such decision, the decision of the Apprenticeship Adviser shall be final.

              Thus the Act prescribes remedy of appeal for an apprenticeship.  He cannot take recourse to the litigation in case of termination of contract of apprenticeship.

              In one case (as reported in 'Business Line', dated 22.11.2010) three persons viz., Ms. K. Poonkodi, Ms. R. Irudhaya Mary and S. Balkees filed a writ petition before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, challenging the orders dated 30^th May, 2008 of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Dindigul terminating the apprenticeship after they underwent 11 months training.  The petitioners contended that there was no remedy open to them except to approach the High Court.  They further contended that they did not avail themselves of the alternative remedy since the termination itself came to be made at the direction of the officers of the Employment Training Department and therefore, the remedy provided under Sec. 20 might no be efficacious. 

            The High Court was unable to agree with the said submission.  The Court held that the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 was enacted to provided regulation and control of training of all apprenticeship.   Hence in case of dispute or disagreement between employer and apprenticeship arising out of contract of apprenticeship should be referred to the Apprenticeship Adviser in terms of Sec. 20 of the Act.  Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Apprenticeship Adviser might prefer an appeal against such decision and such appeal shall be heard and determined by a Committee of the Apprenticeship Council whose decision shall be final subject to the decision of the Committee.

            The Court further held that since the decision of termination was made on the administrative side, whereas the decision under Sec. 20 had to be made on quasi judicial basis, and therefore, there was a fundamental difference between both the heads.

            In the light of the above facts the Court was inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners and dismissed all the petitions.  By this order the High Court confirmed that any dispute between the employer and the apprentice must be settled by Apprenticeship Adviser only.