1 CX.R. 1979 December 18 [TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.] PANAYIOTIS PAPASAWAS, Applicant, v. THE EDUCATIONAL SERVICE COMMITTEE, Respondent. (Application No. 40/79). 5 10 15 20 25 Certiorari—Prohibition—Article 155.4 of the Constitution—Disciplinaryproceedings before Educational Service Committee— Whether their essential nature such that they do not come within the ambit of Article 146.1 of the Constitution—Leave to applyfor orders of CertiorariandProhibition inrelationtosuchproceedingsgranted— Court not prepared, on the basis of the material at present before it, to pronounce on issue of jurisdiction to make such orders— Said issuereservedfor determination at the outset of the consideration of the merits of the application. This was.an application for leave to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition in respect of proceedings pending in relation to the applicant, before the respondent Committee for charges preferred against him under the Certain Disciplinary Offences (Conduct of Investigation and Adjudication) Law, 1977 (Law 3/77) and the Public Educational Service Law, 1969 (Law 10/69). Held, that in view of its decisions in the prima facie similar, though not identical, cases of Vassiliou and another v. Police ' Disciplinary Committees
(1979)1 C.L.R. 46, and Economides v. Military Disciplinary Board
(1979)1 C.L.R. 177, this Court entertains doubts as to whether or not it possesses the necessary jurisdiction; that as, however, the Committee in question is an organ different, in more than one way, from the organs involved in the said two cases and, since it has been pointed out in the Vassiliou case, supra, at p. 54, and, also, in the Economides case,supra,at p. 187,that the possibility cannot beexcluded that, 681 Papasawas v. Educational Service Committee
(1979)depending on the material available before the Court in relation to particular disciplinary proceedings, it might be argued that their essential nature is such that they do not come within the ambit of Article 146.1 of the Constitution, but within that of Article 155.4 of the Constitution, in which case thejurisdiction 5 to make in respect of them an order of Certiorari or of Prohibition would exist, this Court is not prepared, on the basis of the material at present before it in this particular instance, to pronounce, at this very early stage, that it does not possessjurisdiction underArticle 155.4,above,tomakeinthiscasetheorders 10 of Prohibition and Certiorari which are applied for by the applicant; that, therefore, in the light of the foregoing and of the specialcircumstancesofthiscase,thebetter courseistogrant, at this stage, leave to theapplicant to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition and to reserve the relevant issue of juris- 15 diction ofthisCourt for determination attheoutset ofconsideration of the merits of the application; and that, accordingly, leavefor thefilingwithinthreedaysfrom today,ofan application for orders of Prohibition and Certiorari will be granted. Application granted. 20 Cases referred to: Vassiliou and Another v. PoliceDhciplinaryCommittees
(1979)1 C.L.R. 46; Economides v. Military Disciplinary Board
(1979)1C.L.R. 177; ZeniosandAnother v. Disciplinary Board
(1978)1C.L.R. 382. 25 Application. Application for leave to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition in connection with proceedings pending in relation to applicant before the Educational ServiceCommittee in respect of charges preferred against him under the Certain Disciplinary 30 Offences (Conduct of Investigation) Law, 1977 (Law 3/77) and the Public Educational Service Law, 1969 (Law 10/69). E. Vrahimi (Mrs.) for the applicant. CI.Antoniades with S. Papasawas, Counsel of the Republic, for the Educational Service Committee. 35 Cur. adv. vult. TRIANTAFYLLIDES P. read the following decision. Leave is being sought, by means of this application, to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition in respect of proceedings pending 682 1 C.L.R. 5 Papasawas τ.EducationalService Committee Triantafyllldes P. in relation to the applicant before the Educational Service Committee; it appears that in the said proceedings charges have been preferred against him under the Certain Disciplinary Oifences (Conduct of Investigation and Adjudication) Law, 1977 (Law 3/77) and the Public Educational Service Law, 1969 (Law 10/69). I have heard counsel on the issue of the jurisdiction of this Court to make at all an order of Prohibition or of Certiorari in respect of proceedings of a nature such as that of those 10 'pending,as aforesaid, before theEducationalServiceCommittee. In view of my decisions in the prima facie similar, though not identical, cases of Vassiliou and another v. Police Disciplinary Committees,
(1979)1 C.L.R. 46, and Economides v. Military Disciplinary Board,
(1979)1 C.L.R. 177, I must say that I do 15 entertain doubts as to whether or not I possess the necessary jurisdiction. As, however, the Committeein question is an organ different, in more than one way, from the organs involved in theVassiliou and Economides cases, supra,and, since it has been pointed out 20 in the Vassiliou case,supra,at p. 54,and, also, in the Economides case, supra, at p. 187, that the possibility cannot be excluded that, depending on the material available before the Court in relation to particular disciplinary proceedings, it might be argued that their essential nature is such that they do not come 25 within theambit of Article 146.1 of the Constitution, but within that of Article 155.4 of the Constitution, in which case the jurisdiction to make in respect of them an order of Certiorari or of Prohibition would exist, I am not prepared, on the basis of the material at present before me in this particular instance, 30 to pronounce,at this very early stage, that this Court does not possess jurisdiction under Article 155.4, above, to make in this case the orders of Prohibition and Certiorari which are applied for by the applicant. It is correct thatin the Vassiliou case,supra,it became possible to decide on the issue of jurisdiction at the stage of the applica tion for leave to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition; • but, on the other hand, in theEconomides case, supra,leave was granted to apply for an order of Prohibition and the issue of jurisdiction was dealt with when examining the merits of the 40 application. Also, in Zenios and another v. Disciplinary Board, 35 683 Triantafyllides P. Papasarvasv.EducationalServiceCommittee
(1979)
(1978)1 C.L.R. 382, 387, there was adopted the course of granting leaveto apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition and the question of thejurisdiction was left to be decided later "together with all other relevant issues". Ihave,therefore,inthelightoftheforegoingand ofthespecial 5 circumstances of the present case, decided that the better course istogrant,atthisstage,leavetotheapplicant toapplyfor orders of Certiorari and Prohibition and to reserve the relevant issue of jurisdiction of this Court for determination at the outset of the consideration of the merits of the application. In this 10 connection there will have to be examined, interalia,whether or not the Educational Service Committee, in carrying out its task in the present case, istobe treated as beingan administrativedisciplinaryorgan,inwhichcase,ofcourse,inthelightofthe Vassiliouand Economides cases, supra, I would not possess 15 jurisdiction under Article 155.4to make the applied for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition, or the said Committee is to be regarded as a judicial committee, in the sense of Article 30.1 of the Constitution or otherwise, in which case I would be able toexercisethepowersofthisCourt under the saidArticle 155.4. 20 I, therefore, grant leave for thefiling,within three days from today,ofanapplication for ordersofProhibitionand Certiorari. Any opposition thereto is to befiledwithin a week thereafter. The said application, if filed, will be heard on January 5, 1980, at 8.30 a.m. 25 The proceedings before the Educational Service Committee are stayed initially for a period of three days and if an application for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition is filed within such period then they shall remain stayed until a further order of vhis Court. 30 Copy of the present order for leave to apply for orders of Certiorari and Prohibition is to bedelivered to the Educational Service Committee. Application granted. 684