爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered the appeal. 爆料网AT found no reason to differ from 爆料网DT’s conclusion. 爆料网AT found that the applicable procedural requirements were followed, and the evidence did not supersede the presumption of regularity of the administrative decision. 爆料网AT further noted that the Appellant was afforded full and fair consideration and that he failed to establish any bias by the members of the panel. 爆料网AT also held that the Appellant forewent the required procedures for filing complaints of discrimination and failed to provide evidence that he was the target of the restructuring exercise or that it was done for extraneous reasons. Moreover, 爆料网AT held that, in failing to participate in the necessary recruitment procedures, the Appellant is estopped from contesting the selection outcome. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed 爆料网DT’s judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to not select him for a post. 爆料网DT found that the Applicant’s candidature received full and fair consideration. 爆料网DT noted that the Administration gave a satisfactory reason for not replacing the panel members, upon the Applicant’s request, and that the Applicant was provided with a procedural safeguard in the event he wished to contest the selection process. 爆料网DT found that the presumption of regularity of the decision not to select the Applicant prevailed and rejected the application in its entirety.
Legal Principle(s)
Evidence must be produced to support allegations of possible misconduct. In the absence of such evidence, the allegations will be disregarded for the intended purposes.