(1988)1988October6 [STYUANIDES,J.] INTHEMATTEROFARTICLE146OFTHECONSTITUTION GEORGHIOSELIADES. Applicant, v. 1.THEPUBLICSERVICECOMMISSION, 2.THEMINISTEROFFINANCE, 3.THEATTORNEY-GENERALOFTHEREPUBLIC, Respondents. (CaseNo.59/86). PublicOfficers—EmplacementinthePublicServicebyvirtue ofLaw44(85, section42
(1)—TheCommissionshouldhavebeforeitthecompletepicture• andstatusofformeremployeesoftheLandConsolidationAuthority(abolishedbysaidlaw) • Dueinquiry—Lackof,intomaterialfacts—Groundofannulment. Law44/85abolishedtheLandConsolidationAuthorityandsubstituted bytheDepartmentofLandConsolidation.Section42
(1)*madeprovision for safeguarding theemployeesof the Authority. Itprovided thatevery suchemployeewillcomeintheserviceof theRepublicandwillbeemplacedbytheappropriateAuthorityoftheRepublicinapostthestatusand 10 functions ofwhichwillbecomparabletothefunctions ofthepostheldin theserviceoftheAuthority. ThePublicServiceCommission,astheappropriateorgan,emplacedapplicantasAccountingOfficer, 1stGradewithsalaryscalesA8andA
- *Quotedatpp.1848-1849post. 1846 5 3 C.L.R. . . * ' , ' Eliades v. P.S.C. • > * - • · • * By meansofthisrecourseapplicantseeks: (a) Theannulmentofsuch emplacementand(b)Declarationthatheshouldhavebeenemplacedinscale A10-A11+
- 5 1 , .ThePublic Administration andPersonnel Department, wherefrom the submissionforapplicant's emplacementtothesubjudicepostoriginated, comparedtheschemeofserviceoftheapplicantwiththeabolishedauthori-' tywith thatofthesubjudicepost,but whatitdidwasnotevaluation,but harmonization. TherespondentCommission didnotconductaninquiry ofitsown. 10 .. 1'5' 20 >t Held,annullingthesubjudicedecision:
(1)Intakingitsdecisionunder section42(l).theCommission oughttohavebeforeitall thematerial con sideration whichmakeupthecompletepictureofthestatusand functions whichtheapplicantwas carrying intheserviceoftheLandConsolidation ,,:Authority. Itfollowsthatthesubjudicedecision mustbeannulled. ν- · J . " .. ' . - . . ' . . i l l , . » - ο, 3) Itisnotfor thisCourttodecidethepostinthe Public Serviceinto ; whichthe applicantoughttohavebeenemplaced andtherefore prayer (e) ™stfcil. : ' " ρ · ι " „ , , . , •f, , Μ ,- .. Subjudicedecisionannulled. . ,-*.Prayer(e)dismissed.Noorderastocosts. : t "*.!-..wf,* . ':,· Jt Casesreferredto: - •'••»•·> \ ' 25 I · v. 2)Ithastobe,also,annulledonthegeneral groundofAdministrative , .Law, thatoflackofdueinquiry: thatitwas reachedasaresultofdefective exerciseofdiscretionary powersauetolackofsufficient inquiryinto'mateJ rialfactsandlackingduereasoning. -'· > '* ;-; ;• · ; • . v , : . ;. : •· ~.-, ·.. •* .v / t ?<;, ' •-. . ,: ;rv.r·-; ' , v : w ; '. ,Republic v.Gava (196&) 3C.L.R.322;*,,, , .. ,-. , . , ·. Tourpeki v..TheRepublic
(1973)3C.L.R.592;.,.-. ..ίΓ•- /,., · :*,;;•''''.. ·;.ΐν..,. κ ' •• ·•* ' e j \ , : y ; ' · ^ ,.: ' . 1/orda/iouv.r/i«i?cpuWic(l%7)3CIr.R.245;. ,„ C ( ,. ] i V ,,,.^ ; ..: . Ί ' Λ ' ' Χ j . ,•' *•'· ; ' ' ι Μ • ...» ,'" ν ·'.*j. •MytidesandAnotherv. TheRepublic
(1983).3C.L.R..1096., ,\ ^. ..t ' • \ .'*'•• ·--... •;.. ^ - j * * 1847 · ·: •r t v . ' ' · " ? ~Λ' - Eliades v. P.S.C.
(1988)Recourse. Recourse against the decision of therespondents to emplace applicant to the post of Accounting Officer, 1st Grade, in the TreasuryDepartment onsalary scaleA8 andA9 witheffect from 1st August,
- 5 P.Angelides, for the applicant." St.TheodouloUy for the respondents. Cur. adv.vult. STYLIANIDES J.read thefollowingjudgment. The applicant was theAccounting Officer of theLandConsolidation Authority. By Law 44/85theAuthority was abolished and substituted by theDepartmentof Land Consolidation. Inorder tosecureand safeguard theposition of theemployees of theAuthority, provisionwas made insection
- Section 42
(1)reads asfollows: *e "42. -
(1)Παν πρόσωπον το οποίον αμέσως προ της ημερομηνίας ενάρξεως της ισχύος του παρόντος τροπο ποιητικού Νόμου ετέλει εις την υπηρεσίαν της Αρχής ως μέλος τουπροσωπικού αυτήςυπάγεται,απότηςημερομη νίαςταύτηςειςτηνυπηρεσίαντηςΔημοκρατίαςκαιτόπο- ~β θετείται υπό της αρμοδίας αρχής της Δημοκρατίας,ανε ξαρτήτως οιασδήποτε διατάξεως οιουδήποτε ετέρου νόμου, εις θέσιν ήτις θαπεριλαμβάνεται εις τονΤακτικόν Προυπολογισμόν του Τμήματοςκαιδιάδετο εναλλάξιμο και λογιστικό προσωπικό τηςΑρχής εις θέσιν,ήτις θαπε ριλαμβάνεται εις τον Τακτικόν Προυπολογισμόν τηςΔη μοκρατίας,το καθεστώς καιαιλειτουργίαι της οποίαςθα είναι ανάλογοι προς ταςλειτουργίας τηςκατεχόμενης θέ σεως εις την υπηρεσίαν της Αρχής και θα λαμβάνη την αντιμισθίαν αυτούπαράτηςΔημοκρατίας." 30 1848 3C.L.R. Eliadesv.P.S.C. StylianidesJ. ("42.-
(1)Every person whoimmediately before thedate • ' ofthecomingintooperationofthisamendingLawwasinthe 'service of the Authority as a member of its personnel he comes,asfromthatdate,intheserviceoftheRepublicandis 5 emplaced bythe appropriate Authority of theRepublic,notwithstanding anyotherprovision in any other law,in apost •whichshallbeincludedintheBudgetoftheDepartment,and theinterchangeableandaccountingstaff oftheAuthorityina postwhichwillbeincludedintheOrdinaryBudgetoftheRe,Q public,thestatusandfunctions ofwhichwillbecomparableto thefunctions of thepost held in theserviceof theAuthority ' andhewillbepaidhissalarybytheRepublic;") ThatLawcameintooperationon24thMay, 1985. On 8th November, 1985, the Supplementary Budget Law, (No.39) of 1985,(LawNo. 140/85),wasenacted. Bymeansof 15 section4thereof -firstschedule-anewpostofAccounting Officer, 1stGrade, with salary scales A8and A9,for theemplacementoftheholderofthepermanentpostoftheAccounting Officer of the former Land Consolidation Authority in-accordance 2Q with Law 44/85, was created. The creation of such post was made pursuant to a relevant submission of theDepartment of PublicAdministration andPersonneloftheMinistryofFinance. 25 After theenactment ofLaw 140/85thePublic ServiceCommission decided toemplace applicant in thatpost -Accounting Officer, 1st Grade - in the Treasury Department, on the salary scales A8and A9,with effect 1stAugust, 1985.The applicant wasnotified accordingly.Thisisthesubjudicedecisionwhichis challengedbythisrecourse,wherebytheapplicantprays: 2Q "(a)DeclarationoftheCourtthatthesubjudicedecisionof theRespondent No. 1,dated 2nd January, 1986,is nulland voidand/orillegaland/orofnolegaleffect. (b)DeclarationoftheCourtthatapplicantshouldhevebeen emplacedinscalesA10-All +2andnotinanyotherscale." \ 1849 Stylianides J. Eliades v. P.S.C.
(1988)Applicant's counsel submittedthattheappropriateAuthority, which admittedlyundersection42
(1)of Law 44/85is thePublic Service Commission,was boundtoconductaninquiry inorder tofindoutthestatusandthefunctions of thepostheldby the ap plicantintheformer LandConsolidationAuthority andnotsim- 5 ply toactuponthedecision takenby anotherorgan of the Repu blic,i.e.TheMinistry ofFinance. DiomedesAvraam,aPublicOfficer inthePublicAdministra tion andPersonnelDepartment,gaveoraltestimonyinthecourse of thehearing of this recourse.Hestated thatit was his Depart- jg mentwhich madethesubmission totheCouncilof Ministersof theemplacementof theapplicantonthesubjudice scale.They comparedtheschemeof service of thepostof Accounting Offi cer, 1st Grade,in theTreasury Department with theschemeof service heldby theapplicantin theConsolidationAuthority. He ,c characteristically said: "What I did was not evaluation, it was harmonization(εκείνο το οποίο έκαμα δεν ήταν αξιολόγηση, ήταν εναρμόνιση.)" Hedid neitherobtain,norseekinformation regarding theextentandnatureof thedutiesactually perfomed by the applicant. 20 Thereasoning of thedecision of theappropriate Authority ThePublicServiceCommission- toemplaceapplicantinthepost of Accounting Officer, 1stGrade,is setoutintheirletterof25th November, 1985,addressed tocounselfor theapplicant. 25 ThePublicServiceCommissionrefers tosection41
(1)ofLaw 44/85, to theprovision of Law 140/85, afore quoted,andpro ceeds asfollows: "As you areaware theholderof theabovementioned post intheformerLandConsolidationAuthority is Mr.Eliades and 3Q therefore the;PublicServiceCommissionhasthedutytoapply thelaw, by emplacingyourclientinthenewlycreatedpostof AccountingOfficer, 1stGrade." 1850 3 C.L.R. Eliades v.P.S.C. Stylianides J. The Public Service Commission had made no inquiry, whatsoever, tofindout the status, thefunctions and duties of theapplicant intheLand Consolidation Authority: 5 10 15 20 With regard to the Public Administration and Personnel Department, Ihavealreadyreferred tothecomparisonof thescheme of servicemade by thePublic Administration andPersonnelDepartment. Has such failure of theappropriate Authority -thePublicService Commission -anyeffect, havingregard totheprovisionsof section 42
(1)ofLaw'44/85? • ' ' ' In Republic (Public Service Commission) v. Kika Gava
(1968)3 C.L.R. 322 (F.B.), the issue was the emplacement under section 16
(1)of the Transfer of theExercise of the Competencesof theGreekCommunal Chamberand theMinistryofEducation Law, 1965 (Law No. 12of 1965). Section l'6(l·) of Law 12/65 provided that any person in the service of the Chamber shall betransferred totheserviceof theRepublicandbe thereafter placed bytheappropriate AuthorityoftheRepublic therein,asfar as practicable in a post whose'functions are comparable to the functions of thepostheldintheserviceof theChamber. Atpp. 324-325itwas said: 25 30 "We take theview that such decision wasreached without theCommission havingbefore itallthematerial considerations which make up the complete picture of the duties which the Respondent wascarryingout intheserviceof theGreek Communal Chamber. Itisnowup totheCommission to'reconsider thematterof theemplacement of theRespondent^ intheexercise of its relevant powers under section 16
(1)..., and in the light of all relevant considerations, including the material whichwasplacedbefore thetrialCourtatthehearingoftherecourse. * ' 1851 •G3b.. Stylianides J. Eliades v.P.S.C.
(1988)Once the Public Service Commission had taken a decision inthematter, in theexerciseof itsdiscretionary powers,under thesaid section 16
(1),itwasnotopen tothetrialCourtto find that thereexistedon thepartof theCommission an omission; nor was it open to such Court todecide, instead of the Com- g mission, what was the post in the public service to which the Applicantought tohavebeenemplaced, andtomakeadeclaration accordingly." From theabove pronouncement itisplain that the appropriate Authority - the Public Service Commission -in taking the deci- JQ sion under section 42
(1), in thepresent case, ought to have before itallmaterialconsiderationswhich makeupthecompletepictureof the status and functions which the applicant wascarrying intheserviceof theLand Consolidation Authority. The Commission did nothavesuchmaterialconsiderations be- 15 fore itanddid notcarryoutaninquirytofindthemout. The subjudice decision must beannulled, asitwas takenina "nannercontrary totheexplicit provision of section 42
(1)ofLaw 14/85. It has tobe,also,annulled onthe general ground in Adminis- 20 rativeLawof lack of due inquiry; that it wasreached asaresult >fdefective exerciseofdiscretionary powersdue tolackof sufficientinquiry intomaterial facts andlackingduereasoning -(Vaso Tourpeki v. Republic (Public Service Commission)
(1973)3 -.L.R. 592;lordanis G. lordanou v. Republic (Public Service 25 Commission)
(1967)3C.L.R. 245 and Mytides and Another v. Republic
(1983)3 C.L.R. 1096). Prayer (a)will succeed. Withregard toprayer (b),itisnot for this Court todecide the ostin thePublic Service intowhich theapplicant ought tohave eenemplacedand,therefore, itmust fail. 1852 30 3 C.L.R. Eliades v. P.S.C. Stylianides J. After theannulmentof thesubjudice decision theRespondent Commission, as was said inGavacase by theFull Bench,hasto reconsider thematter,after carrying outinquiry in thelight of the statutory provisions of section 42
(1)and in the light of.all rele vant considerations. Subjudice decision is hereby declared hull andvoid andof no effect underArticle 146.4(b). Let therebe noorderas tocosts. Subjudicedecision^annulled. No orderas to costs. . . ι • ''/Λ· 1 , 't *.· • •* ,. V. 'Λ Ί·ί Λ; · ... • •ι ii. i . ;• • * .- *1 \ 71 ' .' * ''t J' r-., f.w - . · . . , , ,.· · 11 1853 '