IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 17561 OF 2012 Between: A.Pydisetty, S/o.Settiyya, 42 years, Ex-Temporary Attender, State Bank of India, Venkateswara Metta Branch, Visakhapatnam, R/o:60-26-22/1, Malkapuram, Prakash Nagar, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER AND 1. State Bank of India, Rep. by its General Manager, Head, Office, Koti, Hyderabad. 2. Dy. General Manager (Admn)^ SBI, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. 3. Asst. Gerl. Manager (Admn), SBI, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. 4. Branch Manager, SBI Venkateswara Metta Branch, Visakhapatnam. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order- /direction or any appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents herein in terminating the petitioner's services orally and directing him not to come to duties from 01-05-2012 onwards as illegal, unjust, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein to continue him in service as Attender and regularize the services from the date of his initial appointment by paying all attendant benefits including arrears. I-A. NO: 2 OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 22495 OF 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to continue the petitioner in service as Attender in the 4th respondent bank pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014fWPMP. NO: 6997 OF 2014) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service either in 4th respondent bank or any other branches of Visakhapatnam city pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2012fWVMP. NO: 2190 OF 20121 Between: Branch Manager, SBI Venkateswara Metta Branch, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT N0.4 AND 1. Pydisetty, S/o:Settiyya, 42 years, Ex-Temporary Attender, State Bank of India, Venkateswara Metta Branch, Visakhapatnam, R/o;60-26-22/1 Malkapuram, Prakash Nagar, Visakhapatnam. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2. State Bank of India, Rep. by its General Manager, Head, Office, Koti, Hyderabad. 3. Dy. General Manager (Admn), SBI, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. 4. Asst. Gerl. Manager (Admn), SBI, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam. (Respondents no. 2 to 4 are not necessary parties to the case) ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 3 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed in WPMP No. 22495 of 2012 WP No. 17561 of 2012 dt. 14.06.2012 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM Counsel for the Respondents: SRI B S PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SMT. V LIMA DEVI The Court made the following: ORDER in ^ APHC010752142012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No: 17561 OF 2012 Between: ...Petitioner A.Pydisetty AND State Bank of India, Rep. by its General Manager, Head Office, Koti, Hyderabad And three others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri S.V.S.S.Siva Ram Counsel for the Respondents: 1. Sri B.S.Prasad 2. Smt. V.Uma Devi The Court made the following order: 1. The petitioner is challenging the oral order of termination directing the petitioner not to attend duties from 01.05.2012. 2. The petitioner was working as a temporary messenger on a consolidated pay of Rs. 1,600/- per month with effect from 26.12.1988. The petitioner worked as an attender-cum-sweeper It is submitted by the learned counsel for the till 30.04.2012. petitioner that the respondents authorities directed the petitioner orally not to attend duties from 01.05.2012. It is submitted that w -2- W.P. No.l7561of 2012 the petitioner has worked for more than 22 years and would not meet the age criteria for any job on account of crossing the age of 40 years as on the date of filing the date of the writ petition. The illegal termination of the petitioner is under challenge. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has admittedly worked in the respondent bank and that the certificates issued by the Branch Managers and the Branches where the petitioner worked are also filed along with the writ petition. 4. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, vide orders dated 14.06.2012, directed the respondents to continue the service of the petitioner as an attender in the 4*^ respondent Bank pending further orders. Later, by an order dated 27.06.2013, the interim orders were modified, whereby the respondents were given liberty to engage the services of the writ petitioner in any of the branches located in Visakhapatnam wherever work is available. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite a positive direction from this Court, the respondents did not engage the petitioner. 6. By an order dated 29.11.2021, this Court directed the learned standing counsel to ascertain the vacancy position in Visakhapatnam District. On 06.01.2022 the learned standing counsel for the respondents sought further time to get information r -3- W.P. No.17561 of 2012 regarding the vacancy position. The respondents in their counter submitted that the petitioner never worked for 240 days in any year and also disputes the claim of 22 years service by the petitioner. It is also submitted in the counter that the petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot seek continuance in employment and that the appropriate remedy would be to approach the competent Labour Court. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. Perused the record. 8. It is not in dispute that this court, vide order dated 14.06.2012 directed the respondents to continue the petitioner in service as an attender in the 4*^ respondent Bank pending further orders. The orders were modified by an order dated 27.06.2013, whereby liberty was granted to the 4'^ respondent Bank to engage the / \ services of the petitioner in any of the branches of Visakhapatnam City wherever work is available. This direction does not completely erode the directions issued by this court on 14.06.2012. The direction issued by this Court on 27.06.2013 th would indicate that the petitioner need not be continued in the 4 respondent Bank if there is no work; however, the service of the petitioner ought to be engaged in any other branch in Visakhapatnam city. The time granted by this court on 29.11.2021, 06.01.2022 and 22.01.2025 to the learned standing li -4- W.P. No.l7561of2012 counsel to revert on the vacancy position have not resulted in submission of any fresh written instructions. 9. Considering the noncompliance of the orders passed by this Court in the writ petition, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondents to engage the services of the petitioner on temporary basis in any existing vacancy in any of the branches in Visakhapatnam city. 10. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed off. No costs. 11. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPU-^EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The General Manager, State Bank of India, Head, Office, Koti Hyderabad. 2. The Dy. General Manager (Admn), SBI, Siripuram Junction Visakhapatnam. 3. The Asst. Gera. Manager (Admn), SBI, Siripuram Junction Visakhapatnam. 4. The Branch Manager, SBI Venkateswara Metta Branch Visakhapatnam. 5. One CC to Sri S.V.S.S.Siva Ram Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri B S Prasad Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Smt. V Uma Devi, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:29/01/2025 !, .. ORDER WP.No.17561 of 2012 , % 'g 2' FEB 2025 3 ^ . Current Section . ^ DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS