clr/1988/1988_3_1461.pdf

(5)and24—Ultra viresthe enabling lawi.e. Cap. 302. -\ .» '* Subsidiarylegislation—Shouldbeconfinedwithin thefour cornersoftheena­ blingstatute—Raisona"etreoftherule. , .v\,,, Thequestion inthiscaseiswhetherRegs. 10

(5)and24of theCyprus TelecommunicationsAuthorityGeneralRegulations1982 (220/82)which providefor theappointmentof subordinatepersonnel by abodyotherthan theBoardof theAuthorityareultravirestheenablingLaw. -'< Held,annullingthesubjudicedecision:

(1)Section 10of Cap.,302con­ ferredpowerontheBoardof theAuthoritytoappointpersonnel neededfor thedischargeof its functions. Section 10was repealedby law 25/63.Asa resultthepowertomakeappointmentwas nolongermentionedinthestat­ ute. Itfollowsthatthenew provision(section 10A),whichmadeprovision for transfer by theAuthority of theexerciseof functions assigned·toitby . Lawto'officers orsubordinateorgansof thecorporationcouldnotbecon­ struedasempoweringthecorporation totransferpowerorauthorityitdid notpossess.

(2)Law 61/70conferredonPublicCorporationsonceagainthepower 1461 Polycarpou v.CY.T.A.

(1988)tomakeappointmentsandpromotions.

(3)Inthetightof theprovisions of sub-sections

(1),

(2)and

(3)ofsec­ tion 3ofLaw61/70 therule-making-power vestedinCYTAby s.43 ofthe principal law (Cap.302) should be read andconstrued as incorporating power tomakeregulationsrelevantinteralia,totheappointmentandpromotionofpersonnel. 5

(4)Subsidiary legislation mustatalltimescomewithinthefourcorners of theenabling law andconform toitsprovisions. Thisisacorollary ofthe sovereigntyof thelegislatureinitsdomain.

(5)Inthiscaseneithersection43 noranyotherprovision of Cap.302 10 conferpowertodelegate thecompetencetomakeappointmentsandpromo­ tionsofpersonnel.

(6)Theaforesaid regulations are,therefore,void. Theycannotbesaved bytheAssignmentof theExercise ofPowersDerivingfrom aLaw,lawof 1962 (Law 23/62)because; (a)They did notdelegate, butentrusted the 15 competencetosubordinate bodies,(b)Delegation underLaw 23/62 can only beeffected by instrumentinwritingspecifying thetermsandcondi­ tionsunderwhichadelegatecouldexercisethepowersvestedthereby. Subjudicedecisionannulled. Noorderastocosts. 20 Casesreferredto: Malachtouv.Attorney-General

(1981)1 C U t .543; Ploussiouv.CentralBank

(1983)3CJL.R. 398; Vakisv.TheRepublic

(1985)3C L J t 534; Tyllirides v. CYTA

(1987)3C.L.R.

1. Recourses. Recourses against thedecision of therespondentto promote the interested parties tosection Leader Β in thedepartmentof TechnicalServicesinpreference andinsteadoftheapplicants. 1462 „ 3 C.L.R. ' Polycarpou v.CY.TA. A. Papacharalambous, for applicantinCaseNo.502/
2. • '* * -• AS. Angelides, for applicantinCaseNo..584/
3. A. Hadjioannou, forrespondent. I, Ph.ValiantislforinterestedpartyL. Hdjigeorghalli. Cur.adv. vult. 15 20 25 30 PIKISJ.read thefollowingjudgment.Thepromotionsofthe interestedpartiesarefirstly questionedbyreference tothevalidity of theRegulations underwhich they we're1promoted toSection LeadersB,inthedejpartmentofTechnicalServicesof therespon­ dents.Alsotheyareimpugnedfor failure tofollow theprovisions of theRegulationsthemselves. Theinterestedparties inthetwo recourses numbering 13 in thefirst and 8 in the second,were promoted by adecision of the Personnel Board of therespon* dents takenon25th'May,1987,duly confirmed by asubsequent decisionof theGeneralManagerdated29thMay, 1987.The pro' motionsweremadepursuant'totheprovisions'of theCyprusTel­ ecommunications Authority GeneralRegulations 1982 (ΚΑΠ. 220/82,publishedon 16thJuly, 1982) hereafter referred to.as the "Regulations".Theseregulations are, asearlierindicated,contestedinthefirstplaceasultravirestheenabling law,namely, theIn­ landTelocommunicationsServiceLaw Cap/302.Assuming they arevalid,counselfor theapplicantsargued,thesubjudicedeci­ sionwouldagainbedefective for breachoftheRegulationsthem­ selves. Thebreachderivesfrom thearbitrary actionof therespondentstodividetheposts tobefilled andgroupthemaccording to thedifferent branchesof thetechnicalservices; andproceedto makepromotionsaccordingtothatdivision,aprocesslimiting the selectionaccordingtospecialization.Theadoption ofthisprocess offillingthevacantposts,resulted infailure oromission on the partoftherespondentstomakecomparisonamongthecandidates in theway envisaged by theRegulations, thatis, by comparing their suitability for'promotion toSectionLeaders B,Technical Services. Inaddition;the sub judice decision is challenged for 1463 / Pikis J. Polycarpou v. CY.T.A.

(1988)failureonthepartoftherespondentstopaydueregardtothesuperiorqualificationsforpromotionoftheapplicantscomparedto allorsomeoftheinterestedparties.Weshallconcernourselves withthefirsttwolegalissuesandthenaddress,ifitisfoundnecessary,thethirdquestion. 5 In order toresolve thevalidity of the Regulations, wemust first ascertain thepowervestedihCYTAto makeappointments andpromotionsofpersonnel,andthentheamenity,ifany,todelegateandifso,inwhatcircumstances,theexerciseofthispower topersonnelororgansoftheAuthority.Reviewoftheprovisions JQ ofCap.302intheirhistoricalperspectivewill,Ibelieve,provide thematerialforresolvingthequestionofultraviresoftheRegulations. Section 10of thelaw (Cap.302)conferred poweronthe Board oftheAuthority toappointpersonnel neededfor thedischargeofthefunctions ofCYTA.AfterIndependenceneedarose 1,toamenditsprovisionsinordertobringthelawintoconformity with the Constitution, notably, Part VII, entrusting power to makeappointmentsandpromotionsatCYTAtothePublicService Commission.This was achieved bytheenactment ofLaw 25/63replacing s.10 and substituting twonew provisions, s.10 20 ands.lOA.Asaresultoftheamendmentofthelaw,thepowerof theAuhtority tomakeappointmentsin thecorporation wasremovedfromthestatute.Section 10Amadeprovisionfortransfer bytheAuthorityoftheexerciseoffunctions assignedtoitbylaw toofficers orsubordinateorgansofthecorporation.Section 10A 25 couldnot,underanycircumstances,beconstrued asempowering thecorporation totransfer powerorauthorityitdidnotpossess. Therefore,itshouldbeconstruedasreferencetoamenitytodelegate theexercise of functions of therespondentsother thanthe appointmentandpromotionofpersonnel. 30 Thedepartureof TurkishmembersofthePublicServiceComission, following theeventsof 1963- 1964,left avacuumin thesphereofauthorityfortheappointmentandpromotionofpersonnel in publiccorporations.Law 61/70aimed to bridge this gap. It conferred authority on public corporations to make ap- 35 pointments and promotions as well as exercise discipline over 1464 3 CX.R. Polycarpou v. CY.T.A PikisJ. personnel in theirrespective departments.Furthermore,itconferred rule- makingpoweronpubliccorporations,wherenon existent,toregulatetheexerciseofthepowersvestedinthemby lawintheinterestoftheirefficient enforcement. -. 5 InthecaseofCYTAtheorganiclawmadeprovisionfortheissueofregulationsforthebettercarryingoutofthelawintoeffect. Inexerciseoftheauthorityvestedthereby,therespondentsmade, withtheapprovaloftheCouncilofMinisters,theregulationshere underreview.Thepertinentquestion,theonethatcallsforanim10 mediateanswer,iswhetherthepartoftheRegulationsthatmakes provision for theappointment andpromotion of personnel by a body other than theBoard of the Authority was ultraviresthe law.Torepeatregulations 10

(5)and24providedfortheappointmentof subordinatepersonnel,thatis,personnelotherthanthat ,c classedasseniorpersonnel,byabodyotherthantheBoardofthe Authority;thatis,bythepersonnelcommitteewiththeapproval ofthegeneralmanager. Section 3

(1)ofLaw61/70vested,asearlierindicated,competence in public corporations to make appointments andpromo2Q tionsof personnel in theirorganizations.Thispowershouldbe exercised according to theexplicit provisions of s. 3

(2)of the samelawinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthelawgoverning theestablishment andfunctioning of individual publiccorporationsandregulationsissuedortobeissuedregulatingtheexercise of such competence. Lastly,s.3

(3)expanded therule -making powerof individualcorporationstoincludeauthoritytoregulate bytheissueofappropriate rulestheexerciseofthecompetence vestedin themby s.3

(1)of Law61/70,thatis,toappoint,pro·: moteandtransferpersonnelandmattersincidentalthereto. 3 " 35 Therefore,therule-making-powervestedinCYTAbys.43of theprincipallaw(Cap.302)shouldbereadandconstruedasincorporatingpowertomakeregulationsrelevant,interalia,tothe appointment andpromotion ofpersonnel.However,authorityto makeregulationsgoverningagivensubjectdoesnotautomaticaliyvalidateevery partofthem.TheRegulations intheirentirety 1465. PikisJ. Polycarpou v.CY.T.A.

(1988)andindividualprovisionsmustbeapropersubjectforregulation havingregardtothepowerenablingtheenactmentofsubsidiary legislation.Courtshaveproclaimed,timeandagain,thatsubsidiarylegislation mustatalltimescomewithinthefour cornersof theenablinglawandconformtoitsprovisions.Thisisacorollary 5 ofthesovereigntyofthelegislatureinitsdomainandtheabsence ofpowertolegislate,exceptbyandinaccordancewiththeterms laid down by the legislature itself. (Malachtou v. AttorneyGeneral

(1981)1 C.L.R.543,Ploussiouv.GeneralBank

(1983)3C.L.R398).Andderogation from thisprinciple would under- ,^ minethedoctrineofseparationofpowersandleadtotheassumptionoflegislativecompetencebyabodyotherthanthelegislature. Did s.43ofCap.302,asamendedbys.3ofLaw61/70,confer power todelegate byregulations thecompetence vestedin CYTAtomakeappointmentsandpromotionsofpersonnel? ^ Neithers.43noranyprovisionofCap.302doesconfer sucha power explicitly orimplicitly. Power todelegate authority toa bodyotherthanthatnominated bylawmustbefound intheprovisionsofthelawitself. Authority toregulatebyrulestheexerciseofpowervestedin agiven bodydoes notimport powerto 20 delegateauthoritytosubordinateorgansofthatbody.Therefore, therespondents actingwiththeapprovaloftheCouncilofMinistersexceededtheirauthorityinmakingprovisionfortheexercise of thepower toappoint andpromote bya body other thanthe Boardoftherespondents.Iam, therefore, driven totheconclu- 25 sionthatReg. 10

(5)and24areultraviresthelawandthepromotionshereunderreview,madeundertheprovisionsofthesubject Regulations, must likewise beinvalidated asillegal andan improperexerciseofthepowervestedintherespondents. Beforeleavingthischapterwemustanswerthesubmissionof counselfortherespondentstotheeffect thattheAssignmentof theExerciseofPowersDerivingfromaLaw,Lawof 1962 (Law 23/62),providedanalternativebasisforthevalidationofthedelegationofpowertothePersonnelCommitteewiththeapprovalof theGeneralManagertomakeappointmentsandpromotionsinthe '5 1466 30 3 C.L.R. Polycarpou v.CY.T.A. Pikis J. service. The answer is again in the negative for the reasons explainedbelow: , The Regulations did not delegate authority to the Personnel Committee tomakeappointments andpromotionsbutentrustedit 5 withthecompetenceintheexerciseofrule-makingpowerclaimed by the respondents. Therefore, the provisions of Law 23/62 are irrelevanttothevalidityofthepertinentregulations.Furthermore, assumingthatLaw 23/62could beinvoked bytherespondentsin relation totheircompetence toappoint andpromote,aquestion I 10 leave open, thedelegation could only beeffected in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Law,23/62, that is,by instrument in writing specifying the terms and conditions under which adelegatecouldexercisethepowersvestedthereby.Moreover,powerdelegated inaccordance with theprovisionsof Law ,c 23/62can,in accordance withtheprovisionsof s.4 of thelaw,be exercised at alltimesbytheprimaryvestee of thepower unlessa contrary intention appears from the act of delegation. Evidently Reg. 10of theRegulations isin nosensetheactofdelegationof authority madeundertheprovisionsofLaw23/62. 20 30 In view of the above conclusion, it is unnecessary to debate theremaining aspectsof therecoursesexcept todraw attention to the principles adopted in Vakis v.Republic

(1985)3C.L.R. 534 and Tyllirides v.CYTA

(1987)3C.L.R. 2071 that establish that thedivision ofpersonneleligibletopromotion intocategories,other than those specified by the law, constitutes an impermissible exercise of the power topromote, apt torender thedecision defective. Inview of theabove,the subjudice decision isdeclared, pursuant topara. 4(b)of Art. 146,tobevoid and of noeffect whatsoever.Thereshall benoorder astocosts. Subjudice decisionannulled. No orderas tocosts. 1467