|
ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ
|
|
|
Κυπριακή νομολογία στην οποία κάνει αναφορά η απόφαση αυτή:
Μεταγενέστερη νομολογία η οποία κάνει αναφορά στην απόφαση αυτή:
Δεν έχει εντοπιστεί απόφαση η οποία να κάνει αναφορά στην απόφαση αυτή
(1989) 3A CLR 723
1989 June 21
[BOYADJIS.J.]
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 146 OF THE CONSTITUTION
ELIAS M. PETRIDES,
Applicant.
v.
ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY OF CYPRUS,
Respondent.
(Case No. 721/88)
Judicial control-Failure to record suggestions by manager of respondent authority relating to transfer of officer-Renders judicial control impossible-Sub judice decision annulled-ChristodouIides and Another v. The Education Service Commission (1986)3 C.L.R. 1637 applied.
By means of the sub judice decision the interested party was transferred to the sub judice post. In accordance with the regulations in force the sub judice post could be filled either by transfer or promotion. The applicant held at the time the immediate lower post. The decision to fill the post by transfer and not a promotion was influenced by suggestions by the Manager of the Authority, in respect of which no record had been kept.
Sub judice decision annulled. No order as
to costs.
Cases referred to:
Christodoulides and Another v. Educational Service Commission (1986) 3 C.L.R. 1637,-
Nicolaides v. Electricity Authority of Cyprus (1989) 3 C.L.R. 1172,
Petousis v. Electricity Authority of Cyprus (No 2) (1989) 3 C.L.R. 1738.
Recourse.
Recourse against the decision of the respondent to fill the vacant post of Area Engineer (Executive) by the transfer of the interested party instead of by the promotion of the applicant.
G. Stylianides for E. Efstathiou, for the Applicant.
A. Stylianidou (Miss) for G. Cacoyannis, for the Respondent.
Cur.adv. vult.
BOYADJIS, J. read the following judgment. This recourse raises a single point which is squarely covered by judicial authority. It concerns the adequacy of the reasoning which every administrative act or decision requires if it is to survive judicial control. The point has arisen in the context of the following admitted facts:
By its sub judice decision taken on 27 June 1988, the respondent Authority filled the vacant post of Area Engineer (Executive), Scale A13, by the transfer of the interested party SofoclisSofocleous pursuant to his application for transfer to the aforesaid post, instead of by the promotion of the applicant.
The interested party was holding at the material time the post of Transmission Engineer (Substations), Scale also A13, whereas the applicant was holding the post of Electrical Engineer, Scale Π .14. The post of Area Engineer (Executive) is a promotion post and under Regulation 13(2) of the Electricity Authority of Cyprus (Conditions of Service) Regulations of 1986, it is filled either by the promotion of an employee holding, as the applicant did, a post of a grade immediately lower to it, or by the transfer of an employee holding, as the interested party did, a post of equal grade.
The sub-judice decision is being challenged by the applicant on a number of legal grounds including that of lack of due reasoning.
It is an admitted fact that, in taking its decision, the respondent authority was influenced by the suggestions made and the views expressed by the Manager of the Authority and other officers thereof which, however, were not recorded and are, therefore, unknown both to the persons affected thereby and to the Court.
The aforesaid omission deprives the sub judice decision of control impossible. Moreover, it offends against basic principles of proper administration. The consequences of such an omission on the validity of an administrative act or decision were considered by the Full Bench in Revisional Jurisdiction Appeal No. 426 between Andreas Christodoulides and Another v. The Educational Service Commission (1986) 3 C.LR.1637, where it was treated as a fatal defect of the decision leaving to the Court no choice other than the annulment thereof. Ever since its issue the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench is being constantly followed and applied on similar circumstances by all the Judges of this Court who, in the exercise of their revisional jurisdiction had the occasion which I have had to deal with similar cases. Examples are afforded by the recent decisions in the cases of SteliosNicolaides v. Electricity Authority of Cyprus (1989) 3 C.L.R. 1172 and Spyros Petousis v. Electricity Authority of Cyprus (No.2) (1989) 3 C.L.R. 1738.
The same devastating consequences on the validity of the sub judice decision flow from the aforesaid admitted omission of the respondent Authority in the present case. it is vitiated by a fatal defect depriving me of any alternative other than to declare it annulled and of no legal effect whatsoever, on the sole ground of lack of due reasoning.
In the result, the sub judice decision is annulled. No order as to costs.
Sub judice decision annulled. No order as
to costs.