Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the appellant did not identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment was defective. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Appellant merely reiterated allegations already thoroughly examined by Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT findings such as to warrant its reversal. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that there was no merit in the appeal. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested his non-selection for a position. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT rejected the application.
Legal Principle(s)
The appeals procedure is of a corrective nature and not an opportunity for a dissatisfied party to reargue his or her case. The appellant has the burden of satisfying Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective, and it follows that the appellant must identify the alleged defect in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.