Applicant, who was appointed as a computer engineer, could not be appointed due to the negative results of the security investigation. The annulment lawsuit filed by the applicant against the aforementioned situation was rejected by the administrative. Court and the appeal against the decision was rejected definitively by the regional administrative court. After the applicant, who was represented by a lawyer, personally learned the reasoning of the final decision of the regional administrative court through the National Judicial Informatics System (UYAP), the decision was notified to the lawyer.
ALLEGATIONS
The applicant claimed that his right to a fair trial was violated in the annulment case he filed against his dismissal on the grounds that his security investigation and archive search were negative.
EVALUATION OF COURT
In the concrete case, during the examination made on the UYAP document transaction log regarding the regional administrative court decision, it was determined that the relevant decision was opened and read by the applicant on 27/3/2019 at 18.09. the last decision in the judicial process. Although the applicant’s attorney was notified on 6/4/2019, it was observed that the applicant’s attorney was aware of the decision earlier by accessing the decision subject to the application via UYAP. In light of this information, it should be accepted that the applicant read the UYAP decision of the Regional Administrative Court, was aware of the final decision dated 27/3/2019 regarding the individual application and the individual application period started to run. As of 27/3/2019.
order to file an individual application, the application must be filed within thirty days from the date of completion of the ordinary remedies. In cases where the remedy is not specified, the thirty-day period will start from the date of learning of the violation. In the concrete case, it was observed that the applicant, who learned about the final decision regarding the judicial process subject to the individual application on 27/3/2019, filed the application on 30/4/2019 after 26/4/2019. It is concluded that no excuse was presented in the application, which was the last day of the thirty-day individual application period, and that the individual application is inadmissible due to out of time.
Due to reasons explained above, Constitutional Court ruled that application was inadmissible for being out of time.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.