1. A short, but interesting question arises for consideration in this petition. Petitioner is a scheduled bank. Second respondent claiming himself to be an employee of the petitioner approached the first respondent, the appellate authority under the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) alleging that his services have been illegally terminated. The application put in by the second respondent was entertained as Shop Appeal No. 71/78. During the pendency of that petition, Government by Notification dated 20-4-1982 exempted all scheduled commercial Banks from all the provisions of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960. Consequently, the petitioner put in an application before the first respondent questioning his jurisdiction to proceed with Shop Appeal No. 71/78. By Ext. P1 order dated 30-7-1982 the first respondent over-ruled the objection. Finally by Ext. P2 order dated 1-11-1982 the first respondent directed him to pay a sum of Rs. 70,000/- as compensation in addition to back wages. Petitioner challenges Exts. P1 and P2 orders.

2. Toe learned counsel appearing for the respondents would contend that wh