(1988)1988February26 [LORIS,J.] INTHEMATTEROFARTICLE146OFTHECONSTITUTION CLEARCHOSMILTIADOUS, Applicant, v. THEREPUBLICOFCYRPUS,THROUGH THEPUBLICSERVICECOMMISSION, Respondent. (CaseNo. 180185). Timewithinwhichtofilearecourse—Publicationofsubjudicedecisioninthe OfficialGazetteasrequiredbyrelevantlaw—Timebeginstorun asfrom suchpublication,irrespectiveofwhenthedecisioncametotheknowledge oftheapplicant. Timewithin which tofile arecourse—Theissuemayberaisedandexamined 5 byCourtexpropriomotu. Theapplicantimpugnesbymeansofthepresentrecoursethedecision of therespondent P.S.C.toappoint 12interested parties (Nos. 1-12) and promoteinterestedpartyNo. 13 tothepostofAdministrativeOfficer, GeneralAdministrativeStaff,inpreferencetoandinsteadoftheapplicant. 10 Theaforesaid appointmentsandthepromotionofinterestedpartyNo. 13 werepublishedintheOfficial GazetteoftheRepublicdated19.10.1984. Therecoursewasfiledon12.2.1985. Held,dismissingtherecourse:
(1)Section37
(4)ofThePublicService Law33/67requiredthepublicationofthesubjudiceappointmentandsection44
(6)ofthesubjudicepromotion. 324 15 3 C.L.R. Miltiadous v. Republic
(2)Thetime,within whichtofiletherecourse challengingthesubju dicedecision begantorunasfrom suchpublication,irrespectiveofwhen thedecision inquestioncametotheknowledgeoftheapplicant. Recoursedismissed. Noorderasto costs. 5 Casesreferredto: Moran v.Republic, 1R.S.C.C. 10; Markoullidesv. TheGreek CommunalChamber,4 R.S.C.C. 7; Pissas(No. 1)v.EA.C.
(1966)3C.L.R.
- ΙΟ Recourse. Recourseagainstthedecisionoftherespondenttoappoint and/ orpromotetheinterestedparties tothepostofAdministrativeOf ficer inpreference andinsteadofthe applicant. AS. Angelides, forapplicant. 15 A.Vassiliades, fortherespondent. X.Xenopoulos, forinterested parties 1,2,5,8,10 and
- A. Tryphonos (Mrs), forinterested party
- K.Talarides, forinterested party
- M. Papapetrou, forinterested party
- 20 W. Panayiotou,forinterested parties6and
- M.Vassiliou, forinterested part
- Cur. adv. vult. 325 Miltiadous v. Republic
(1988)LORIS J. read the following judgment. The applicant impugnes bymeansof thepresentrecourse thedecision of therespondent P.S.C. to appoint 12interested parties (Nos. 1- 12) andpromoteinterestedpartyNo. 13tothepostofAdministrative Officer, GeneralAdministrativeStaff,inpreferencetoandinstead 5 oftheapplicant. Bymeansofprayer"A"inthepresentrecourseapplicantchallengestheletterof therespondent P.S.C.dated 2.2.85bywhich he wasinformed that hehadnot been selected for promotion in theaforesaid post 10 Invirtueofprayer "B"heappliesforadeclaratoryjudgmentto theeffect that,thedecisionoftherespondentP.S.C.publishedin theofficial Gazetteof theRepublicdated 19.10.84,wherebyinterestedparties 1-12 wereappointedandinterestedpartyNo.13 waspromoted tothe aforesaid post, bedeclared null anddevoid 15 ofanylegaleffect, whatever. Insubstancebothprayersaredirectedtothesameendnotably theannulmentofthesub-judicedecision whichwaspublishedin theOfficial GazetteoftheRepublicon19.10.84. Thepresentrecoursewasfiledonthe 12thFebruary, 1985. 20 Therespondent P.S.C.in itswritten address aswell assome of theinterested partiesraisedthepreliminary objection thatthe present recourse wasfiled outof time.Theissuewhether arecourse is filed out of time can, in any event, beraised by the Court acting expropriomotu,inviewof paragraph 3of Article 25 146of the Constitution, as theprovisions of thesaid paragraph aremandatoryandtheyhavetobegiveneffect inthepublicinterest (vide Moranv.TheRepublic,1R.S.C.C. 10, Markoullides v.TheGreekCommunalChamber, 4R.S.C.C.7). The Public Service Law, 1967,(LawNo.33/67) invirtueof 30 s.37
(4)requiresthat: 326 3 C.L.R. MHtiadous v. Republic Loris J. "Apermanent appointment shall bepublished inthe Official Gazette of the Republic as soon as possible after it has taken effect". 5 Likewise s. 44
(6)of the same law ordains that "Promotions shall bepublished intheofficial GazetteoftheRepublic." By virtue of the sub-judice decision interested parties 1-12 were appointed and interested party No. 13waspromoted to the permanentpostof Administrative Officer, General Administrative Staff, with effect from 15.10.1984. 10 The aforesaid appointments and the promotion of interested party No. 13werepublished in the Official Gazetteof the Republic dated 19.10.1984 (vide Nos.2469 and 2470). The present recourse was filed on 12.2.1985 i.e. some 116 days after the aforesaid publication in the Official Gazette as aforesaid. 15 Paragraph 3 of Article 146 of the Constitution reads as follows: ^" "Such arecourse shall bemade within seventy-five daysof thedate when thedecision or act waspublished or,ifnotpublished and in the case of an omission when it came to the knowledgeof theperson making therecourse." In thecaseof Charalambos Pissas (No. 1)v.E.A.C.
(1966)3 C.L.R. 634,at p.637 it was held that: "In view of the wording of such paragraph, I am of the opinion that, once there has been publication of an act, time begins to run, for the purposes of the said paragraph, from. such publication, irrespective of when the act or decision in question cametotheknowledgeof theperson concerned. InGreecetheposition isnot thesamebecausetherethepro327 Loris J.
(1988)Miltiadous v. Republic vision corresponding to paragraph 3of Article 146,section 49
(1)ofLaw3713/1928,providesthattimecommencestorun fromthecommunicationorpublicationoftheactconcernedor from thetimewhen theperson concerned hascome toknow thereof InCyprus,however,wheretherelevantprovision 5 (Article 146.3)isnotthesameinitsmaterialpartsastherelevantGreekprovision (section49
(1)ofLaw3713/1928),there isnoroom,inmyopinion,fortheapplicationoftheaforesaid principles, as evolved in Greece, and, therefore, it has tobe heldthattime,inthepresentCase,begantorunfrom thepub- *, licationoftherelevantOrderofacquisition...." Itiscrystalclearfromtheabovecitedcase,whichreceivedjudicial approval repeatedly ever after, that thepresent recourse which wasfiledsome 116daysafter thepublication of thesubjudicedecisionintheOfficial Gazetteisdoomedtofailurehaving * beenfiledoutoftime,whichbegantorunforthepurposesofArticle 146.3 from the publication of 19.10.1984 irrespective of whenthedecisioninquestioncametotheknowledgeoftheapplicant; andinthislatterconnectionthereisnotaniotaofevidence totheeffect thattheapplicantdidnotunderstandthattheappoint- „ ment of the interested parties was connected with his nonselection. In theresult present recourse is hereby dismissed ashaving beenfiledoutoftime. Lettherebenoorderastocosts. 2 Recoursedismissed. Noorderastocosts. 328