Judgment :- K.K. SASIDHARAN, J. Whether retrenched Instructors of private industrial institutes are entitled for alternative employment in Government Industrial Training Institutes, is the core issue that arises for consideration in this intra-court appeals filed at the instance of the State of Tamil Nadu. Facts in Nutshell: 2. The first respondent in the concerned appeals were appointed as Instructors/Junior Training Officers (hereinafter referred to as "Instructors") in St.Sebastian's Industrial Training Centre, Madhavaram. While so, the institution issued orders on 31 December 2001 terminating the services of the Instructors. The Instructors filed writ petitions for issuing directions to the Government to give them alternative employment. The writ petitions were disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 1 August 2002 directing the Employment and Training Department to consider the representations and pass appropriate orders on merits. Thereafter, the representations were considered by the first appellant. The Director, Department of Employment and Training rejected the request for alternative employment on the ground that the Instructors were not Government Employees and as such, it was not possible to absorb them in Government Technical Institutions. 3. The Instructors challenged the rejection orders before this Court in W.P.Nos.42171, 42172, 42174, 42175 and 33026 of 2002. The learned Single Judge opined that the Instructors were all working for the last twelve years under the second respondent and as such, they are entitled for alternative employment. The learned Judge placed reliance on a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.12, Labour and Employment (P2) Department dated 3 February 2010 to allow the writ petitions. The learned Judge ultimately directed the appellants to give alternative employment to the Instructors in any one of the Government Industrial Training Institutes under the State of Tamil Nadu. Feeling aggrieved by the positive direction given by the learned Judge, the appellants are before this Court by way of this intra-court appeal. Submissions: 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellants, contended that the instructors were all employees of a private Technical Teacher's Training Institute and as such there was no question of their absorption in Government institutions. The learned Additional Government Pleader contended that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 3 February 2012 was in respect of absorption of the erstwhile employees of a Public Sector Corporation. Therefore, no reliance could be placed on the said Government Order. 5. The learned Additional Government Pleader contended that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 3 February 2012 was in respect of absorption of the erstwhile employees of a Public Sector Corporation. Therefore, no reliance could be placed on the said Government Order. 5. The learned counsel for the Instructors submitted that appointments of Instructors/Junior Training Officers were approved by the Government and as such, they should be treated as Government employees. According to the learned counsel, similar indulgence was shown by the Government earlier resulting in issuing an order in G.O.Ms.No.12 Labour and Employment (P2) Department dated 3 February 2010 and as such the learned Single Judge was fully justified in giving a positive direction for absorption. Discussion: 6. The Instructors were all employed by a Private Industrial Training Institute by name St. Sebastian's Industrial Training Centre at Madhavaram, Chennai. The appointments were made without reference to the Government. Since it was an industrial Training Institute, instructors should possess the required qualification. It was only for the said purpose, the Government considered the qualification of the Instructors and approved their appointments. That does not mean that the approved instructors have become the employees of Government. 7. The learned Single Judge proceeded on the premise that the appointments were all approved by the Government and as such they are deemed to be the employees of Government. Similarly, the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.12 Labour and Employment (P2) Department dated 3 February 2010 was taken as a basic material to arrive at a factual finding that similarly placed employees were earlier absorbed in Government service. We have perused the said Government Order. It is found that the employees covered by the said Government Order were retrenched by the Tamil Nadu Steels Limited and they were accommodated in other Public Sector Corporations. The Government also permitted the Commissioner of Employment and Training to fill up 184 posts of Junior Training Officer and to consider those retrenched officers against those posts. Therefore, it is clear that the Government Order referred to by the learned Single Judge pertains to the employees of a State owned Corporation. However, that is not the case here. The instructors were all employees of a private institution. The Government was not bound to absorb them in service consequent to their retrenchment. Therefore, it is clear that the Government Order referred to by the learned Single Judge pertains to the employees of a State owned Corporation. However, that is not the case here. The instructors were all employees of a private institution. The Government was not bound to absorb them in service consequent to their retrenchment. The Government has not given any offer to the Instructors that in case, the private institution is closed, they would be given alternative employment in Government service. The Instructors have no right to direct the Government to accommodate them in Government Service. We are, therefore, not in a position to agree with the views expressed by the learned Single Judge as a supportive reason to allow the writ petitions. Conclusion: 8. In the result, the writ appeals are allowed. The writ petitions in W.P.Nos.42171, 42172, 42174, 42175 and 33026 of 2002 are dismissed. Consequently, the connected Mps are closed. No costs.