Note
This is Unoficial Translation of the Amharic Text
Cassation File No. 44044
Hamle 29, 2001 E.C.
Judges: Menberetsehay Tadesse
Hagos Woldu
Hirut Melese
Belachew Anshiso
Sultan Abatemam
Applicant: Arada Sub-City Kebele 01/02/11 Recreation Club
Biya Abadara (Attorney) appeared
Respondent: W/ro Mulatwa Baye appeared
We have examined the file and rendered the following judgment.
J U D G M E N T
The cassation petition is filed against the judgment rendered by the Federal First Instance Court under File No. 26924 on Tahsas 13, 2001 E.C., which was upheld by the order of the Federal High Court under File No. 75706 on Yekatit 20, 2001 E.C. As can be seen from the file, the dispute started when the respondent filed a suit against the applicant claiming that she was inappropriately transferred to another position from her previous position as a cashier, and requesting a decision declaring the transfer illegal and reinstating her to her former position.
The applicant, on its part, admitted that the respondent was assigned and working in the said position; however, it argued that it was obliged to transfer the respondent because the position was given back to the individual who had been assigned and working there before her, pursuant to a court decision. Finally, the court that entertained the suit, after examining the dispute, decided that the respondent should continue working assigned to the cashier position. The court to which an appeal was submitted against this decision dismissed the appeal, stating that the decision has no defect. The cassation petition is filed against this.
On our part, based on the petition submitted by the applicant in its application dated Yekatit 27, 2001 E.C., we summoned the respondent and heard the litigation. The hearing was based on the issue: Is it appropriate to decide that the change of position /transfer/ taken by the applicant against the respondent is illegal? Therefore, we have examined the arguments made in this regard in conjunction with the law and the decision against which the petition is filed.
D E C I S I O N
1. We have stated that there is no reason for the respondent to be reinstated to the cashier position.
2. The parties shall bear their respective costs and expenses. Let the file be returned.
It bears the illegible signatures of five judges.