On September 10th, the First Section of the Administrative Litigation Chamber of the Supreme Court (TS) denied an appeal for cassation filed by the MAP officer of the Villajoyosa Local Police, who is acting as an interim inspector, ratifying a previous decision by the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV).
The Supreme Court verdict imposes procedural charges on the officer of up to 2,000 euros, which he must pay (1,500 euros) to the Villajoyosa City Council and (500 euros) to the other party involved in the procedure as a victim.
The officer, who serves as an inspector by decision of the Councillor for Personnel, working on behalf of Mayor Marcos Zaragoza (who is charged in another case involving appointments in the Local Police), has suspended the selection process for the permanent job of Inspector. In February 2024, Alicante’s Administrative Court No. 4 rejected his application for clearance. MAP was appointed as a “interim” inspector nine months after the initial verdict.
This verdict upheld the constitutionality of the administrative resolution appealed by MAP, as well as the selection committee’s activities during the selection process.
The officer had contested his result (4.25 points) in the practical test for the Villajoyosa Local Police Inspector competition, which was an internal promotion. He alleges that the practical test violated the competition’s rules and syllabus, accusing the administration of “arbitrariness and misuse of power.”
Assignment of temporary inspector duty.
The City Council and the other plaintiff contended that judicial review could not substitute the examining board’s professional and technical judgement, which is discretionary unless blatantly arbitrary, which was not proved in this case.
According to testimonies made by the sitting judge and witnesses, the decision against the officer was based on the fact that the actual scenario was entirely consistent with the call’s curriculum and guidelines. It was also predicated on the fact that the officer had not previously opposed to the test, and the issue arose only after learning of the unfavourable grade. The entire procedure was legally binding, fair, and objective, with no evidence of abuse of power or arbitrariness.
Other sentences
Months later, in May 2024, another Administrative Litigation Court, this time number three in Alicante, decided against the MAP officer. In this situation, the officer asserted a violation of the call’s bases (Base 7), claiming that the accumulation of places between internal promotion and free shift was improper.
Furthermore, the practical scenario proposed by the examining board did not meet the syllabus, indicating a misuse of power. Furthermore, he had been hurt.
Author: Derek Appleton
Other Articles
Alarm over the appearance of dog food with hooks in Alicante
No Comment! Be the first one.