Petitioner challenged a Government Order shifting recruitment to outsourcing for ITI instructors. Relied on a previous batch judgment holding such policy changes outside judicial interference, disposed of the petition noting limited scope for interference with policy decisions.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
W.P.No.31063 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.30478 of 2022 & 32063 of 2023
C.Rathika
... Petitioner
Vs.
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
Page 1 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
Directorate of Employment and Training, Alandur Road, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
6.The Principal, Government Industrial Training Institute, Veeralimalai 621 316.
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O.Ms.No.133, issued by the Labour Welfare and Skill Development (S1) Department dated 17.10.2022, on the file of the 2nd respondent and the tender notification No.30870/Estt4/2020 dated 01.11.2022 issued by the 4th respondent to quash the same and directing the 3rd respondent permitting the petitioner to continue in the same employment as faculty of language and software skill instructor.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Louis
For Respondents : Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi, CGC for R1 Mr.S.Rajesh, GA for R2 to R5
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed for quashment of the impugned G.O.Ms.No.133, issued by the Labour Welfare and Skill Development (S1)
Department dated 17.10.2022, on the file of the 2nd respondent and the tender notification No.30870/Estt4/2020 dated 01.11.2022 issued by the 4th
Page 2 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
respondent and for a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent permitting the petitioner to continue in the same employment as faculty of language and
software skill instructor.
3.The case of the petitioner herein is similar to that of the dispute which arose in a batch of Writ Petitions in W.P.No.26050 of 2022 batch ( B.R.Srikanth and others Vs. the Director of General Training and others ). In the said Writ Petitions, this Court has passed the following order:
“8.Having failed to get an order for regularization, the petitioners have now challenged the Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.133, Labour Welfare and Skill Development (S1) Department, dated 17.10.2022. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, the order has been issued just to select an agency through open tender for the purpose of entering into contract with the agency for a period of one year or to renew the contract for the period of two years based on their services.
9.The Government Order further empowers the Principals of concerned ITIs to enter into agreement with the
Page 3 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
selected agency and outsource suitable candidates with relevant qualifications prescribed by DGT, New Delhi for a period of 11 months and make payment to the agency.
10.It appears from the above Government Order that the policy of the Government has been shifted to outsourcing from direct recruitment. If the petitioners are interested in engaging themselves in the service so given by the outsourcing agency to the individual ITI institutions, they can apply to the outsourcing agents and continue to get their services engaged. The petitioners' past experience would earn them browny points in case they apply to the outsourcing agents selected by the Government.
11.The Government availed the services of the petitioners and fulfilled all the demands by engaging them in temporary services through outsourcing and calling it as contractual services. It is a matter of concern that a model employer like the Government resorting to such a practice, knowing well that certain class of services are needed on permanent basis in certain Departments. As the impugned Government order is a policy decision of the Government, this Court has a limited scope for interference. However, the Government has to consider the plight of the community, which acquired qualifications on the hope of getting employment in Government Services.
Page 4 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
12.With the aforesaid observations, these Writ Petitions stands disposed of.”
5.In the light of the order passed by this Court in the Writ Petitions as stated supra, this Writ Petition is disposed of by observing that the Government availed the services of the petitioner and fulfilled all the demands by engaging her in temporary services through outsourcing and calling it as contractual services. It is a matter of concern that a model employer like the Government resorting to such a practice, knowing well that certain class of services are needed on permanent basis in certain Departments. As the impugned Government order is a policy decision of the Government, this Court has a limited scope for interference. However, the
Page 5 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
Government has to consider the plight of the community, which acquired
qualifications on the hope of getting employment in Government Services.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed.
23.10.2024
vkr
Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No
To
Employment Exchange Building, IARI Campus, New Delhi 110 012.
Skill Development (S1), Secretariat,
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
3.The Secretary, Department of Employment & Training, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
The Directorate of Employment & Training, Thiru Vi.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
Page 6 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
5.The Assistant Director,
Crafts man Training Scheme, Directorate of Employment and Training,
Alandur Road, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
6.The Principal, Government Industrial Training Institute, Veeralimalai 621 316.
Page 7 of 8
W.P.No.31063 of 2022
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
vkr
W.P.No.31063 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.30478 of 2022 & 32063 of 2023
23.10.2024
Page 8 of 8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court can interfere with the Government policy decision to shift from direct recruitment to outsourcing services for ITIs.
Whether the petitioner, similarly placed to petitioners in a related batch, is entitled to similar relief.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.R.Srikanth and others Vs. the Director of General Training and othersRelied on¶37
B.R.Srikanth and others Vs. the Director of General Training and others (W.P.No.26050 of 2022 batch)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
C. Rathika
Director General of Training, The Ministry of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship
Secretary to the Government, Department of Labour Welfare and Skill Development (S1)
Secretary, Department of Employment & Training
Director, The Directorate of Employment & Training
Assistant Director, Crafts man Training Scheme
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
