HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 3979 OF 2004

O R D E R:

Aggrieved by the Award dated 27.06.2003 passed by the 1^st respondent Tribunal in LCID No.16/2002 directing reinstatement of the 2^nd respondent without back wages, petitioner Bank is before this Court.

2. The case of petitioner bank is that the 2nd respondent, who was a temporary employee, filed ID No. 9 of 2000 before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam under Section 2 (A)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, challenging his termination from service. The said dispute was transferred to the 1st respondent where it was re-numbered as LCID No. 16/2002.

2.1 It is stated that petitioner bank contended before the Tribunal that due to mechanisation of branches, the need for Attenders has considerably reduced in branches and offices in petitioner Bank, as such they are not in a position to absorb all the temporary attenders who are in the panel. It can absorb them only as and when the vacancies arise and they had taken a stand before this Court that it would not recruit any other person to fill up the regular vacancies and only candidates from the panel of temporary attenders alone wil1 be consi