3 C.L.R. 1985 June8 [TRIANTAFYLLIDES, Ρ ] INTHE MATTER OF ARTICLE 146OF THE CONSTITUTION ANDREASPAPANDREOU, Applicant, ν 1 THE EDUCATIONALSERVICE COMMISSION, 2 THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, Respondents (CaseNo 597/84) Legitimate interest — Secondment of an educationalist to thePaedagogical academy notinsteadof the applicantand independently of therefusalto second the latterto the Academy — Applicantdoes not possess a legitimate interesttochallengethe secondment 5 Executory act— Internal measure of administration— Refusal to second an educationalistto thePaedagogical Academy — The change of duties and termsofserviceinvolvedm suchasecondment indicate, asatpresentadvised. thatthe matter isonefor executory administrativeaction 10 In this case the following two preliminary issues were set down for determinationbytheCourt, namely 15 (a) Whether the applicant, aneducationalist, hasa legitimate interestto challenge the secondmentofthe interested party,anothereducationalist, to the Paedagogical Academy, and(b)Whether therefusal of therespondentsto second the applicant to the said Academy is an internal measure of administration Held
(1)As theinterested partywas notseconded totheAcademy instead of the applicant and the decision to second the interested party was taken independently of the refusal to second theapplicant, the latter has no legitimate interesttochallenge thesecondmentof theinterested party 20
(2)The change of duties and ofcollateral terms ofservice thatwouldbe involved inthesecondmentofaneducationalist,suchastheapplicant,tothe Academy indicates that the matterofsecondment isnot merely an internal measureofadministration,butamatterofexecutory administrative action 669 Papandreou v. E.S.C.
(1987)
(3)Itfollowsthatasregardsthe refusal tosecondtheapplicantthereshould bea hearingonthemerits. Orderaccordingly. Preliminary objections. Preliminary objections as to whether the applicant has a 5 legitimateinterest under Article 146.2oftheConstitution entitling him to challenge the secondment of the interested party to the Paedagogical Academy and whether the refusal of the respondents to second applicant tothe said Academy constitutes aninternalmeasure ofadministrationwhichcannotbeattackedby 10 meansof a recourse. A.S. Angelides, for the applicant. R. Vrahimi(Mrs.), for the respondents. Cur.adv. vult. TRIANTAFYLLIDES P. read the following decision. At the 15 present stage of these proceedings I have to pronounce on the following twopreliminaryissues: (a)Whether the applicant has a legitimate interest, in the sense of Article 146.2 of the Constitution, entitling him to challenge by this recourse the secondment of another 20 educationalist, G. Papadopoulos, to the Paedagogical Academy; and (b) Whether the refusal of the respondents to second the applicant to the said Academy is an internal measure of administration which cannot be attacked by means of the 25 present recourse. Fromthematerialbefore methereappearsquiteclearlythatG. Papadopoulos was not seconded to the Academy instead of the applicant, inasmuch asheandtheapplicantwerenotcomparedas regards suitability for secondment to the Academy in order to 30 teach Englishthere sincethedecisiontosecond G. Papadopoulos wastakenindependently ofthedecisionoftheappropriate organs inthe MinistryofEducationthatinanyeventtheapplicantwasnot to be seconded to the Academy because in the past his services there had notbeen satisfactory. 35 Itfollows, therefore, thatthe secondment of G. Papadopoulos to the Academy did not, and could not, affect directly and adversely any existing legitimate interest of the applicant, in the 670 3 C.L.R. Papandreou v. E.S.C. Triantafyllldee P. senseof Article 146.2 of the Constitution; and, consequently, this recourse,insofarasitisaimedatsuchsecondment could nothave been madeandcannotbepursuedand hastobedismissedtothat extent. 5 As regards the issue of whether the refusal or failure of the respondents tosecond theapplicanttotheAcademyisan internal measure of administration and, as such, it does not come within the ambit of the jurisdiction under Article 146
(1)of the Constitution, at this stage of the proceedings, and as at present 10 advised, Iamoftheviewthatthechangeofdutiesandofcollateral terms of service that would be involved in a secondment of a schoolmaster, such as the applicant, to the Academy indicate strongly that this matter cannot be treated as merely an internal measure of administration and that it has to be regarded as IS executory administrative action which could be madethe subjectmatter of the present recourse under Article 146.1 of the Constitution. In relation, therefore, to the said refusal there should be a hearing of thiscase on the merits. 20 Orderaccordingly. 671