1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Malkan for the petitioner. It emerges from the record that even according to the petitioner's own submission, he has been appointed as a trainee i.e. (Laboratory Assistant traninee). Undisputedly his training has not been extended/continued and has been put to an end.
2. After extension of training period the respondent thereafter did not further extend the training period. Aggrieved by the said decision of the respondent i.e. decision to not to further extend the training period, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of present petition praying for following relief/s:
"8(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside termination of petitioner's service in the name of non-renewal of training period communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 25.3.2009 issued by the respondents.
8(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service."
3. The petitioner who was engaged only as a trainee does not have any right to be appointed on regular basis or to claim that he should be appointed on regular basis or to claim further extension or continuation of training period.
4. Besides this, the respondent is registered and incorporated as co-operative society which is engaged in manufacturing fertilizers and that therefore the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy to raise dispute and get it adjudicated.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, the petition fails and the same stands disposed of.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) (ila) Top