Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT concurred with Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT that the Appellant neither appealed the administrative decision not to select him for the post, nor challenged the selection process or the JAB¡¯s conclusion, but rather he discussed the release of a Confidential Letter which occurred after the selection process. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT was correct in finding that the appeal was not receivable with respect to the non-promotion. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Appellant failed to establish that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT committed errors warranting the reversal of its determination that his challenge to the decision to release the Confidential Letter was not receivable. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT correctly concluded that the issue related to the disclosure of the Confidential Letter arose from an administrative act that took place after the proceedings concerning the non-selection process were already underway and was an issue which constituted an independent matter that should have undergone administrative review. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT was competent to review its own jurisdiction, whether or not it had been raised by the parties. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested his non-promotion and the release of a confidential letter from his counsel expressing concerns and requesting an investigation of the matter to a number of staff members. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the application was not receivable as it was time-barred.
Legal Principle(s)
To identify the grounds for judicial appeal, the party must clearly express them and include in his or her pleas the corresponding part of the judgment under appeal with specific reference to the contested administrative decision. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT is competent to review its own jurisdiction, whether or not it had been raised by the parties.