Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on ACP Scale Eligibility for Trainees. The court ruled that the period spent in apprenticeship does not count as regular satisfactory service for the purpose of Assured Career Progression Scale under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal by Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited against a High Court decision granting Assured Career Progression Scale (ACP Scale) benefits to three respondents based on their apprenticeship training. The respondents claimed entitlement to the second ACP Scale after completing twenty years of service, including their apprenticeship period. The High Court had ruled in their favor, stating that the training period should be counted as regular satisfactory service. The Supreme Court analyzed the legal definitions and obligations surrounding apprentices under the Apprentices Act, 1961, and the specific provisions of the ACP Scheme. It noted that apprentices are not considered employees with rights to regular service benefits unless explicitly stated in their contracts. The court found that the High Court had erred in its interpretation of the relevant policies and clarificatory letters, which did not apply to the respondents' situation as they were not regular employees during their apprenticeship. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment but clarified that any financial benefits already received by the respondents would not be recovered. The appeal was disposed of with costs to be borne by the parties.

Headnote

A) Employment Law - Assured Career Progression Scale - Eligibility Criteria - Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, Section 79 - The court examined whether the period spent as an apprentice could be counted towards regular satisfactory service for the purpose of granting the Assured Career Progression Scale. It held that the respondents, being apprentices, did not have a statutory right to claim regular service benefits, and their training period could not be counted as regular satisfactory service under the ACP Scheme (Paras 28-29).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the period spent in apprenticeship can be counted towards regular satisfactory service for the grant of Assured Career Progression Scale.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, ruling that the apprenticeship period could not be counted as regular satisfactory service for the ACP Scale. However, it clarified that any financial benefits already received by the respondents would not be recovered.

Law Points

  • Assured Career Progression Scale
  • Apprenticeship
  • Regular Satisfactory Service
  • Employment Obligations
  • Clarificatory Letters
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (SC) (01) 27

Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2013

2013-01-07

Dipak Misra, K. S. Radhakrishnan

Shivendra Dwivedi, R. K. Kapoor

Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited and Others

Harkesh Chand and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal regarding entitlement to Assured Career Progression Scale benefits.

Remedy Sought

The appellants sought to challenge the High Court's order granting ACP Scale benefits to the respondents.

Filing Reason

The respondents claimed entitlement to the second ACP Scale based on their apprenticeship training.

Previous Decisions

The High Court ruled in favor of the respondents, stating their training period should count as regular service.

Issues

Whether the period spent in apprenticeship can be counted towards regular satisfactory service for the grant of Assured Career Progression Scale.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellants argued that the respondents, as apprentices, did not have a right to claim regular service benefits. The respondents contended that their training period should be considered for ACP Scale eligibility.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that apprentices do not have a statutory right to claim regular service benefits unless explicitly stated in their contracts, and their training period cannot be counted as regular satisfactory service under the ACP Scheme.

Judgment Excerpts

The period spent by the apprentice does not count as regular satisfactory service. The High Court has erred in its appreciation of the contents of the promotion policy.

Procedural History

The appeal arose from a judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which had upheld the entitlement of the respondents to the ACP Scale based on their apprenticeship training.

Acts & Sections

  • Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948: Section 79
  • Apprentices Act, 1961: Section 2(aa), Section 2(aaa), Section 18, Section 22
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Petitioners in Sales Tax Matter Due to Inter-State Trade. Transactions Deemed Inter-State Trade, Exempting Them from State Tax under Article 286(2) of the Constitution.
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Quashes Cancellation of Assignment Patta for Backward Community Housing. The court found that the cancellation of assignment patta was invalid due to the lack of individual notices to the petitioners, violating natural justice princ...