Alarm penalty can only be called after the data on the matter on the alleged violation

Administrative Court Oujda
Rule number 2000/259
* The authority has the right of the label that has the right to discipline.
* Defect is a lack of jurisdiction of the General and the Court raised automatically if not adhered to by the appellant.
* Can not manage to sign the death the right of the alarm only after
the employee Astdla were made ​​by the person concerned about the offense charged under Chapter 66 of the Public Service Act.
* On 31/10/2000
Abdelkader Khchin against the regional deputy of the Ministry of National Education laparoscopic
* On behalf of His Majesty the King
* On 31/10/2000, the Court issued Administrative Oujda is composed of the following:
LLC. Mohammed exclusively: Chairman and Rapporteur;
LLC. Abdul Razzaq al-Tawfiq: member;
LLC. Abdul Rahim Bergala: member;
The presence LLC. Omar Sadiq: a royal commissioner;
With the help of Ms. Khadija Timeout: writer settings.
Sentence reads as follows:
Between: the Khchin Abdel Kader, a professor of the second cycle, Nador.
Vice President: Mr. Hassouni pots, a lawyer Authority and Jeddah.
As claiming on the one hand
And between:
Director of Secondary Ibn Battuta, Nador;
Mr. Deputy Regional Ministry of National Education, laparoscopic;
The Minister of National Education in Rabat;
Mr. Prime Minister, in Rabat.
As defendants, on the other
[...]
After deliberation, according to the law:
Reasoning
It aims to appeal to the abolition of the administrative decision issued by the Regional Deputy of the Ministry of National Education laparoscopic alert the judge lowered the death the right of the appellant in the cause of a defect and not inquiring about the reasons for absenteeism.
In the figure: it satisfies all the conditions of the appeal form must also be made ​​against the law and must be within the legal term, according to the form and character of a law which required him to be an acceptable form.
In essence
About the legality of the contested decision:
Where he is scheduled accordingly and spend the defect of jurisdiction in its destruction whether subject matter jurisdiction or jurisdiction spatial or temporal scale is regarded as the only aspect of cancellation of public order, which owns the court raise automatically as the cause of abolition, even if not adhered to by the appellant because of its grabbing jurisdiction and violation of legal rules that determine the competent authority in the direct legal work.
Since Chapter 65 of the General Regulations of the Public Service Authority, which has the right of the label that has the right to discipline.
As taken from the legal drafting of the above mentioned article, it is not permissible to take disciplinary penalty provided for in Article 66 of the Public Service Act only by the Minister of National Education as the authority of the label or the person authorized to him according to law, and that every breach of this requirement status makes all the disciplinary decision abuse unblemished defect lack of jurisdiction and is doomed to cancellation.
As taken from the contested decision that the Attorney-Regional Ministry of National Education, inflicted disciplinary punishment against the appellant in the form of the alert added to the Public administrative precedent disciplinary is in this legal work is not considered disciplinary authority of the appellant as has been said and is not mandated in that statutory mandate, which decision shall be flawed grabbing competence leading to the abolition of the administrative decision being appealed and the order of the legal effects on the removal of its effects especially since the terms of reference of MP as defined in chapter I and II of the decision of the Minister of National Education No. 99/1192 issued on 5 August 1999 and the laws governing the terms of reference do not allow him to take such administrative decision contested the neutral to the requirements of Article 65 of the Public Service Act above, the Court raises on its own jurisdiction grabbing a defect in the contested administrative decision and eliminate its cancellation.
Since it is on the other hand if the defect is because Almnay on the legality of the administrative decision being appealed, Eliminating administrative framework to shed control over administrative decisions on the occasion of the appeal which has the right to verify the authenticity of the facts of the administrative decision being appealed and their legal, and then Fjhh management respondent when Bngab explained its decision to the appellant for work despite the lack of competence in taking shall be bound to prove the cause of absenteeism, which was not evidenced after Bmqpol reluctance to answer is which decision shall be in addition to this fraught defect lack of reasoning which has to be canceled.
As well as that Chapter 66 of the Basic Law-General of the Public Service that is alert and alert decision reasoned issued by the authority which has the right to discipline without consulting the Disciplinary Board after Astdla data on the matter is this call a basic guarantee for the employee to replace the guarantees conferred upon him in the framework of the Council disciplinary view of the nature of the disciplinary punishment light resulting from such absence of the alleged Therefore, administration must guide the inquiry in writing to the employee in order to make all the data, explanations and documents justifying violations of culpability before she goes ahead to the rhythm of the death alert in his right, and that meant that he could not manage to sign the death alert in the right only after the offending employee Astdlaúh the statements and clarifications about the abuse against him under penalty argue that the legality of such resolution of the breach of the right to defend him parallel to the guarantee of the Disciplinary Board.
As a management respondent after the reluctance to answer did not show the benefit of direct inquiries of the appellant for his absence, which has been non-existent did not include in its decision direct inquiry in question and thus remain above procedure as a substantial result for violation of invalidity is fixed pursuant to the application of Article 366 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 66 of the above remain in the contested decision as well as being flawed defect reason for lack of jurisdiction and does not fulfill the essential procedures required by law and all this will lead to the government to rescind it.
Operative
For these reasons
The administrative court which requires a public elementary or her presence:
In the form: accepting the challenge.
In essence: the decision to cancel the administrative control of the regional deputy of the Ministry of National Education of 13/03/2000 Judge punishing alert against the appellant, including the consequent legal implications.
The power automatically to all parties.
This Judgement in the day, month and year above.
The disciplinary board to explain his opinion to be issued instead confined to generalities, without a search does not determine the date of the quarter follow-up.

إرسال تعليق

أحدث أقدم

نموذج الاتصال