Court holds Public Service Commission termination is not an act of government and is subject to judicial review under Article 146.1.
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe court ruled that the termination of a Public Service Commission member's services does not constitute an 'act of Government' and is therefore subject to judicial control under Article 146.1 of the Constitution. The applicant argued for judicial review, while the respondent contended the matter was non-justiciable executive action. The decision follows the precedent set in Louca v. President of the Republic, establishing jurisdiction over such administrative terminations.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IAArticle 146 of the Constitution; Article 146.1 of the Constitution: An administrative termination of a Public Service Commission member is not an 'act of Government' and may be subjected to judicial control by the Supreme Court.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IAGiurisprudenza citata
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*22] 1983 May 21
(TRI ANTAFYLLIDES, P.)
REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
In the matter of Article 146 of the Constitution
Antonios K. Anastassiou,
Applicant,
v.
The President of the Republic,
Respondent.
(Case No. 133/82).
Public Service Commission - Member - Termination of Services - Not an “act of Government” - Can be subjected to judicial control by means of a recourse under Article 146.1 of the Constitution - Louca v. President of the Republic (1983) 3 C.L.R. 783 followed.
T. Papadopoulos, for the Applicant.
R. Gavrielides, for the Respondent.
X. Xenopoulos, for the Interested Parties.
JUDGMENT
The following judgment was delivered by:-
TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P.:- For the reasons given in the judgment which I have just delivered today in case No. 32/82 (Louca v. The President of the Republic)+ I find that the complained of termination of the services of the applicant as a member of the Public Service Commission is not an “act of Government” and can, therefore, be subjected to [*23] judicial control by this Court in the present proceedings.
The further hearing of this case on its merits will be fixed after the expiry of the period during which an appeal may be made by any party to this case against my above finding, and if 'such an appeal is made I shall await the outcome of the appeal, because it will not be proper to deal with the merits of this case so long as there would exist the possibility of being found on appeal that the sub judice decision is, contrary to what I have held, an “act of Government” and, therefore, that I have no jurisdiction to entertain this recourse against it under Article 146 of the Constitution.
Order accordingly.
+ Reported in (1983) 3 C.L.R.783.