“The Federal Supreme” is invalidating a ruling to end the service of a disciplinary employee

The Federal Supreme Court resolved an appeal ruling that refused an employee’s lawsuit regarding the cancellation of his workplace’s decision to end his service for disciplinary reasons, as the court indicated that the contested decision is void, to nullify the procedures for investigating the employee as stipulated in the law.

In the details, an administrative lawsuit employee has established a demand to cancel the termination of his service, and the judiciary by returning him to his work with the disbursement of all his dues, explaining that “his workplace issued a decision to end his service, and refused his grievance from this decision, which was built on an unlawful reason and its issuance from a competent one, and contrary to the rules It is organized by the human resources list in independent federal authorities.

The first instance court ruled to reject the case, and was supported by the Court of Appeal, and the employee was not satisfied with the ruling, and he was challenged by the veto.

The employee said that “the ruling violated the law and erred in its implementation, that the investigation of it with the violations attributed to it was not in accordance with the procedures required by the law, which is considered one of the basic guarantees in the trial of the employee.”

The Federal Supreme Court supported the appeal, explaining that “if the legislator obliges the administration before issuing a decision regarding the discipline of a public employee referred it to a committee to investigate the violations attributed to it, then it is inevitable that the administration’s commitment to form the committee according to the face determined by the law as this is a fundamental measure that is intended Achieving a basic guarantee for the trial of the employee, otherwise the decision issued to punish the employee is defective with the defect of doubt.

She pointed out that the constant in the papers is that the Chairman of the Board of Directors issued a decision to form an investigation committee regarding what was attributed to the plaintiff, formed by three members of the Board of Directors, in addition to the committee’s decision, and the committee began its work and ended in its decision to recommend that it ends the employee service for low performance and lack of efficiency Functional and violating the provisions of the Personnel Affairs Regulation, which is the recommendation that the Chairman’s decision to confirm it to end the employee service.

She concluded that the plaintiff adheres to the failure of these fundamental formal procedures, which the administration did not refute in its memoirs, which sacrifices the decision to end the employee service void to invalidate the procedures of the previous investigation of his issuance, which was not aware of the ruling, which defects him and must be rejected.