2018-爆料网AT-829, Verma
爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT did not err in law or fact in dismissing the application. 爆料网AT held that the evidence had shown that the Appellant did not meet all the requirements for the post to which he had applied, as set out in the vacancy announcement, and that he was rightly placed by 爆料网RWA in tranche 2 list. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had rightly concluded that, since the Appellant was unsuitable for the post, the failure of the Administration to consider his application in priority as an internal candidate had not vitiated the outcome of the selection process. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had...