clr/1982/1982_3_309.pdf

(1982)not be entertained because of educational reasons consisting of the existence of surplus of teachers at Nicosia schools and corresponding scarcity of teachers at rural schools. In a communique issued by the respondents, apparently in answer to criticism against their decisions in connection with transfers of elementary school teachers, they spoke about surplus of teachers in the Districts of Limassol and Paphos. 5 Upon a recourse by the applicants against the above transfer: Held, that the administration must give proper reasons for its decision so that the Court may beenabled to ascertain whether |0 the decision complained of is well founded; that though the reasoning of an administrative organ may be ascertained and supplemented from the material in the files of the administration, in the present case no such reasoning can be derived from the documents and files produced in the Court; comparing the 15 reasons that allegedly led the respondents to the transfer of school teachers, as they appear in their said communique, and the contents of their letter ofthe 9th November, 1981,one cannot reach the conclusion that the respondents arrived at their decision in a reasonable manner; that, further, it is a basic principle 20 of administrative law that the administrative organ concerned in each case, in reaching its decision, must have carried out a proper inquiry; that in this case, it does not appear either from the relevant files or from their letter of the 9th November, 1981, that the respondents have gone thoroughly into the grounds 25 put forward by the applicants in their objection against their transfer; and that, therefore, the sub judice decision has to be declared null and void for lack of due reasoning and as being the result of insufficient inquiry on the part of the respondents. Sub judice decision annulled. 3Q Cases referred to: Eleftheriou and Others v. The Central Bank

(1980)3 C.L.R. 85 at p. 98; Bagdades v. The Central Bank of Cyprus

(1973)3 C.L.R. 417 at pp. 428, 429; Savva v. The Republic

(1980)3 C.L.R. 675 at p.

1. Recourse. Recourse against the decision of the respondents to transfer 310 35 3 C.L.R. 5 Vorkas and Another v. Republic applicants from the Fifth Elementary School of Aglandjia to the Elementary School of Psevdas. A. S. Angelides, for the applicants. R. Vrahiml-Karyda (Mrs.), for the respondent. Cur. adv. vult. J. read the following judgment. By means of the present recourse the applicants seek the following relief: DEMETRIADES 10 15 20
2. A declaration and/or decision of the Court that the deci­ sion and/or act of the respondents to transfer the applicants from the Fifth Elementary School of Aglandjia to the Elementary School of Psevdas is null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
3. A declaration of the Court that the omission of the respondents to answer and/or examine the objection of theapplicants as to the said transfer and/or their omission to decide or review their decision about the transfer of the applicantstoPsevdas is void and everything omitted should be done. •
4. A declaration of the Court that the decision and/or the persistence of the respondents to transfer the applicants to Psevdas notwithstanding their objection is void and of no legal effect. The applicants are husband and wife and they are serving as elementary school teachers since 1960 and 1962, respectively. 25 30 35 From the time of their appointment, and until 1975, they had both served in rural schools. In 1975 they were transferred to Dasoupolis elementary school, which is classified as type Ά ' , where they served for one year and from 1976 to 1980 they weie posted at the 4th and 5th elementary schools of Aglandjia, which are of type Ά ' and *B\ The decision for the transfer of the applicants from Aglandjia to Psevdas village was reached by the respondents on the 24th July, 1981, but it was not communicated to them till the 18th August,
5. On the 27th July, 1981, the applicants, who were informed about their transfer from thedaily press, objected in writing against the said decision, setting out the reasons why it ought not to be implemented. Their objection, which is 311 Demetriades J. Vorkas and Another v. Republic

(1982)appended to this judgment andis marked as Document No. 1, was address to the "Τμηματάρχη Στοιχειώδους 'Εκπαιδεύσεως 'Υπουργείου Παιδείας" (Head of Elementaiy Education of the Ministry of Education), and as it appears from it, it was received by " Υπηρεσία Προσωπικού 'Υπουργείου Παιδείας" 5 (Personnel Service of the Ministry of Education), on the 30th July,

1. At p. 2 of the objection, there is the following handwritten note: "E.E.Y.", which apparently means " Ε π ι ­ τροπή 'Εκπαιδευτικές Υπηρεσίας", "γιά ενημέρωση καΐπιθανή ενέργεια π α ρ . " ; (Educational Service Committee,for information 10 and possible action please). This note is initialled and bears as date the 29th July,
2. Though the applicants were interviewed by the respondent Educational Service Committee in connection with their said objection at about the end of August 1981,the official letter 15 sent to them, by which they were informed that they were trans­ ferred to Psevdas, was received by them on the12th September,
3. The applicants did not, until the 9th November, 1981, receive anyreply to their said objection, norwere they informed why their objection was rejected. 20 In their reply of the 9th November, 1981,the respondents set out the reasons why the objection of the applicarts was rejected. The above letter reads as follows:"9 Νοεμβρίου 1981 Κύριο Γεώργιο Βορκα Δάσκαλο Δημοτικό Σχολείο Ψευδά (Μέσω Γενικού Διευθυντή) 'Αναφέρομαι στην αΐτηση/ενστασή σας σχετικά μέτή μετάθεση σας καΐ σαςπληροφορώ δτι ή Επιτροπή 'Εκπαιδευτικής Υπη­ ρεσίας άφοΰ εξέτασε τήν ένσταση σαςκαΐ τΙςπεριπτώσεις δλων τών δασκάλων πού υπηρετούσαν στήΛευκωσία γιά πέντε τουλά­ χιστο χρόνια, δεν μπόρεσε νά Ικανοποιήσει το αίτημα σας,γιά τους ακόλουθους λόγους; (α) 'Εκπαιδευτικοί λόγοι συνιστάμενοι στην ύπαρξη πλεο­ νασμάτων στά σχολεία Λευκωσίας καΐ αντιστοίχων έλλειμάτων σέ σχολεία υπαίθρου. φ ) 'Ανάγκη ικανοποιήσεως δικαιολογημένων αϊτημάτων άλλων συναδέλφων σας γιά μετάθεση. 40 312 25 30 35 3 C.L.R. Vorkas and Another v. Republic Demetriades J. (γ) Oi μετατεθέντες ή ύπερετοϋντες στή Λευκωσία δάσκαλοι είχαν Ισχυρότερους λόγους γιά παραμονή. (Ύπ.) Ι. ΒΑΡΝΑΒΑΣ Πρόεδρος." 5 ("Mr. Georghios Vorkas Teacher Elementary School of Psevdas (Through Director-General) Irefer toyour application/objection in respect of your transfer 10 and inform you that the Educational Service Committee after considering your objection and the cases of all the teachers serving in Nicosia for at least five years, could not satisfy your application for the following reasons: 15 (a) Educational reasons consisting of the existence of redundancies in the Nicosia schools and the respective shortage in rural schools. (b) Need to satisfy justified claims of other colleagues of yours for transfer. 20 25 (c) Those teachers transferred or serving in Nicosia had stronger reasons for their stay. (Sgd) I. Vamavas Chairman.") It is worth to note that this letter was sent to the applicants approximately one month after they had filed the present recourse. As it appears from the statements made by counsel during their addresses, the reasons why the applicants were transferred to Psevdas were the following: On the 26th June, 1981, two teachers, who were then posted at Psevdas elementary school, 30 were transferred to nearby villagesand a couplewho was teaching in Nicosia was transferred to Psevdas village, but after an objection by the latter, the respondents decided that they had good reason not to be transferred and on the 24th July, 1981, they decided to transfer the applicants to Psevdas in the place 35 of the other couple. No explanation has been given to the Court why the two teachers were transferred from Psevdas to nearby villages and what made necessary their said transfers. As it appears from the documents filed, the applicants have 313 Demetriades J. Vorkas and Another v. Republic

(1982)three children. Two of them are attending the Pancyprian Gymnasium atNicosia and the third isa five-year's old daughter. They have nobody to look after the children when they are away at Psevdas and for this reason they are forced to take the youngest child with them to Psevdas. 5 I have already stated the reasons given by the respondents for the transfer of theapplicants to Psevdas, but none answers the grounds put forward by the applicants in their objection. On the 12th October, 1981,however, the respondents, by a communique issued through the Public Information Office, apparently in answer to criticism made against their decision in connection with the transfer of elementary school teachers, among others, they gave the following explanation for such action: 10 " ( γ ) Ή κατάσταση στην 'Εκπαίδευση μετά τήν εισβολή 15 και τόν εκτοπισμό χιλιάδων συμπατριωτών μαςπαρουσίασε πολλά κα'ι Ιδιάζοντα προβλήματαπ.χ.πλεονάσματαδασκά­ λων στην επαρχία Λεμεσού καΐ Πάφου όπου εγκαταστάθηκε μεγάλος αριθμός προσφύγων δασκάλων και έλλείματα στίς επαρχίες Λάρνακας και 'Αμμοχώστου. Ή 'Επιτροπή είναι 20 υποχρεωμένη νά αντιμετωπίσει αυτά τά προβλήματακαι εΐναι φυσικό νά υπάρχουν διαμαρτυρίες καιάντιδράσΕίς". ("(c) Thesituation in Education after theinvasion and the displacement of thousands of our compatriots presented many andparticular problems i.e. redundancies of teachers 25 in Limassol and Paphos Distiicts where a great number of refugee teachers have settled andshortages intheLarnaca and Famagusta Districts. The committee has to face these problems and itisnatural that there should beprotests and reactions"). 30 It is obvious that the reasons given by the respondents in rejecting the objection of the applicants against their transfer to Psevdas are in direct conflict with their communique issued on the 12thOctober, 1981, as in that communique they speak about surplus of teachers inthe districts of Limassol and Paphos, 35 whilst in their letter explaining their refusal to accccd tothe request of the applicants they speak about surplus of teachers in the Nicosia schools. They are, further, an afterthought, It has been repeatedly stated by this Court in a number of 314 3 C.L.R. Vorkas and Another v. Republic Demetriades J. cases that the administration must give proper reasons for its decision so that the Court may be enabled to ascertain whether the decision complained of is well founded. In the case of Eleftheriou and Others v. The Central Bank, 5

(1980)3 C.L.R. 85, Hadjianastassiou J. had this to say (at p. 98): 10 15 "It is said and rightly so, with respect, that it is one of the concepts of administrative law that decisions must be duly reasoned, and which in effect means,that clear and adequate reasons must be given, especially in cases of decisions taken by collective organs. Indeed, this is essential when ~a""decision is unfavourable to the subject, and because in the absence of such reasons, the Court is unable to ascertain whether the decision complained of is well-founded in fact and in accordance with the law". (See also, inter alia, Bagdadesv. The CentralBank of Cyprus,

(1973)3 C.L.R. 417, 428, 429; Savva v. The Republic,

(1980)3 C.L.R. 675, 696). Though the reasoning of an administrative organ may be 20 ascertained and supplemented from the material in the files of the administration, in the present case no such reasoning can be derived from the documents and files produced in the Court. Comparing now the reasons that allegedly led the respondents 25 to the transfer of school teachers, as they appear in their said communique, and the contents of their letter of the 9th November, 1981, one cannot reach the conclusion that the respondents arrived at their decision in a reasonable manner. Further, it is a basic principle of administrative law that 30 the administrative organ concerned in each case, in reaching its decision, must have carried out a proper inquiry. In the present case, it does not appear either from the relevant files or from their letter of the 9th November, 1981, that the respondents have gone thoroughly into the giounds put forward 35 by the applicants in their objection against their transfer. Therefore, the sub judice decision has to be declared null and void for lack of due reasoning and as being the result of insufficient inquiry on the part of the respondents. 315 Demetriades J. Vorkas and Another v. Republic

(1982)In view of my above findings, I consider it unnecessary to deal with the other issues raised in these proceedings. For all the above reasons, the sub judice decision is declarep null and void and of no legal effect. Costs of this application shall be against the respondents. 5 Sub judice decisionannulled.Order for costs as above. "Γεώργιος Βορκας Δ/λος 'Ομήρου 11, Τ.Τ.115 Λευκωσία. Λευκωσία 27 'Ιουλίου, 1981. "Εντιμον Κυριον Τμηματάρχη Στοιχειώδους 'Εκπαιδεύσεως Ύπουργεΐον Παιδείας Λευκωσία. Εντιμε Κύριε, Μέ τήν επιστολή μου αυτή, θέλω νά διαμαρτυρηθώ γιά τήν τελευταία μετάθεση μου άπό τό Ε' Δημοτικό Σχολείο Άγλαντζιας στό Δημοτικό Σχολείο Ψευδά της επαρχίας Λάρνακας. 10 15 20 Είμαι δάσκαλος μέ 22 χρόνια υπηρεσίας καΐ λόγω αρχαιότητας, σύμφωνα μέ τους κανονισμούς μεταθέσεων, πρέπει νά τυγχάνω καλύτερης μετάθεσης. "Εχω υπηρετήσει γιά 15 συνεχή χρόνια στην ύπαιθρον και μάλιστα σέ σχολεία διδιδάσκαλακαι τριδιδάσκαλα πού βρίσκοντο σέ μακρινές αποστάσεις. Ή απόσταση μεταξύ της μόνιμης διαμονής μου και της νέας μετάθεσης μου είναι αρκετά μεγάλη, περίπου 22 μίλια, καΐ λόγω τοϋ ότι δέν δικαιούμαστε οδοιπορικά άλλα μόνο κάποιο επίδομα ενοικίου, τά έξοδα μεταβάσεως μου στό Ψευδά είναι δυσανάλογα μέ τό επίδομα πού δικαιούμαι. ^ 30 'Επίσης ή μεγάλη απόστασηδυνατόν νάεπηρεάζεικαΐ τήνέγκαι­ ρη προσέλευση μου στό σχολείο λόγω απροβλέπτων δυσκολιών. "Εχω δυο παιδιά πού φοιτούν σέ Γυμνάσιο καΐ Ινα πού είναι προσχολικής ηλικίας καΐ πηγαίνει σέ νηπιαγωγείο καΐ δέν μπορώ -J5 νά μετοικήσω στό Ψευδά κσΐ ν' αφήσω τό σπίτι μου. Πολλές 316 3 C.L.R. Vorkas and Another v. Republic Demetriades J· δέφορέςσυμβαίνει νά μεταφέρωό ίδιοςτά παιδιά μου στό σχολείο, είτε γιατί ό καιρός είναι .βροχερός είτε γιά άλλους λόγους. Μ' Ολοτό σεβασμό πούτρέφω προς τό πρόσωπο σαςκύριε τμηματάρχη, μέτή νέαμετάθεση μουσχημάτισα τήν εντύπωση 5 ότι βρίσκομαι σέ διωγμό ή ότι τιμωρούμαι άπότήν υπηρεσία. Χωρίςνάτό θέλουμε σάν άνθρωποι,συγκρίνουμε ποια μεταχείριση έχουν άλλοι συνάδελφοι, πού όχι μόνο δέν υπηρέτησαν στην ύπαι­ θρο ή υπηρέτησαν πολύ μικρό χρονικό διάστημα σέ μεγάλα σχολεία της υπαίθρου καΐ γιά συνεχή ολόκληραχρόνια,υπηρετούν 10 πάντα σέ θέσεις πολύ βολικές μέσα στην πόλη πούκατοικούν. 15 20 Χωρίς νά νομισθεί, ότι ζηλεύω συναδέλφους πού τυγχάνουν πάντα προνομιακής μεταχείρισης θα ήθελα νά αναφερθώ στά τελευταία χρόνια της υπηρεσίας μουστή Λευκωσία. Μετακινή­ θηκα σέ τρία σχολεία, άπότά όποΤα τά δύο ήταν νεοΐδρυτα. 'Αναφέρομαι στό Δ' Δημοτικό Σχολείο Άγλαντζιάς και τό Ε' Δημοτικό Σχολείο Άγλαντζιας. Τάν πρώτο χρόνο εργάστηκα στά σχολεία αυτά κάτωάπο πολύ αντίξοες συνθήκες διότι συυεχίζετο ή ανέγερση τους και τά δεύτερο χρόνο σέ συνθήκες σκληρής δουλείας γιά οργάνωση σχολείου καΐ διαμόρφωση εξωτερικών χώρων. Αυτά τά αναφέρω, όχι γιατί θέλω προνομιακή μεταχείριση όπως άλλους συναδέλφους, άλλα γιατί δέν ανέχομαι ούτε και νά αδικούμαι. 25 30 "Αν πραγματικά υπάρχουν λόγοι γιά τους οποίους τυγχάνω αύτηςτης μεταχείρισης σας παρακαλώ πολύ νάμοϋτους γνωστο­ ποιήσετε. Μέ εκτίμηση, Γ. Βορκας Ε.Ε.Υ. . Γιά ενημέρωση κα'ιπιθανή ενέργεια, παρ.29.7.81 Υ.Γ. Οί ίδιοιλόγοι πού αναφέρονταιστην επιστολή τοΰ συζύγου μου, Ισχύουν κάϊ γιά τό άτομο μου. Μέ εκτίμηση, Χρ. Βορκα". 317 Demetriades J. Vorkas and Another v. Republic

(1982)("Georghios Vorkas Teacher Omerou Str. 11,T.T. 115 Nicosia Nicosia 27 July, 1981 5 Hon. Head of Elementary Education Ministry of Education Nicosia. Hon Sir, With this letter of mine, 1 wish to protest against my last 10 transfer from the 5th Elementary School of Aglandjia to the Elementary School of Psevdas of Larnaca District. I am a teacher with 22 yeais service and due to seniority, according to the Regulation regarding transfers, I must have a better transfer. 15 I have served for 15 years in rural posts, in schools with two or three teachers which were located in long distances. The distance between my permanent residence and my new transfer is quite long, about 22 miles, and due to the fact that we are not entitled to any travelling allowance but only to some 20 rent allowance, the costs of my proceeding to Psevdas are dispro­ portionate to the allowance I am entitled to. The great distance may also affect my punctual attendance to the school due to unforeseen difficulties. ί have two children attending the Gymnasium and one of pre-school age who is attending a kindergarten and I cannot change residence and move to Psevdas and leave my house. Many times it happens that I take my children to school, either because the weather is rainy or for other reasons. 25 With all the respect I have for your person Mr. Directoi, 30 with my new transfer I formed the opinion that I am under persecution or that I am being punished by the service. With­ out intending it, as men, we compare the treatment which other colleagues receive, who not only have not served in rural posts or have served for a very short period in big rural schools and 35 for many continuous years, are serving always in posts very convenient in the town where they live. 318 3 C.L.R. Vorkas and Another v. Republic Demetriades J. Without being considered that I amjealous of colleagues who have always received privileged treatment I would like to refer to the last years of my service in Nicosia. I have been moved to three schools, two of which were newly established. 5 I refer to the 4th Elementary School of Aglandjia and the 5th Elementary School of Aglandjia. The first year I served in these schools under very difficult conditions because their erection continued and the second year under conditions of hard work for organizing the school and the formation of the 10 outside space. I state these, not because Iwant privileged treatment as other colleagues, but because I cannot tolerate being treated unjustly. 15 20 If there really exist reasons for which 1 receive this treatment, I request you to notify them to me. With respect (Sgd) G. Vorkas E.S.C. For information and possible action please. (Sgd) 29.7.81 P.S. The same reasons referred in my husband's letter refer to my person also. With respect (Sgd) Chryso Vorka") 319