Summary
In Tacoma v. Civil Serv. Bd., 10 Wn. App. 249, 518 P.2d 249 (1973), this court recognized the existence of a fundamental right of a public employee to enforce, by judicial fiat if necessary, those portions of the Civil Service Act which affect him. No violation of such a right was found in that case, however.
Summary of this case from Green v. Civil Service Comm'nOpinion
No. 1001-2.
December 19, 1973.
[1] Administrative Law and Procedure — Judicial Review — Power of Courts. The superior courts have constitutional and inherent power to review nonjudicial administrative actions which are illegal or manifestly arbitrary and capricious when such actions violate fundamental rights.
Civil Service — Fundamental Rights — What Constitutes.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 199652, John D. Cochran, J., entered February 5, 1973.
Gene Godderis (of Healy Godderis), for appellant.
Robert R. Hamilton, City Attorney, F.H. Chapin, Jr., and John R. Kramer, for respondent.
Affirmed.
Action seeking review of civil service action. The plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of the defendant.
In a prior opinion of this court involving the same parties hereto ( Tacoma v. Civil Serv. Bd., 6 Wn. App. 600, 494 P.2d 1380 (1972)), we decided that the Civil Service Board of Tacoma did not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by an employee of the City of Tacoma who alleged that he had been arbitrarily demoted to his former position during a period of probationary service in a position of higher rank. After remittitur, the employee, Officer Kowalski, attempted by motion to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court to resolve the issues which had been submitted originally to the Civil Service Board. The court denied Officer Kowalski's motion. This appeal followed.
[1] The superior courts of this state possess constitutionally granted and inherent power to review illegal or manifestly arbitrary and capricious nonjudicial administrative acts of public officials or agencies which are violative of fundamental rights. State ex rel. DuPont-Fort Lewis School Dist. 7 v. Bruno, 62 Wn.2d 790, 384 P.2d 608 (1963). The issue presented by this appeal resolves, therefore, into a question of whether or not any fundamental right of a public employee has been violated when he is employed under a civil service system and, after having been promoted and temporarily placed in a position of higher rank for a probationary period, he is returned during that probationary period to his permanent classification without having been notified of any specific reason therefor.
[2] To posit the question in that manner is to answer it. The fundamental right of a public employee under a civil service structure is enforcement, by judicial decree, if necessary, of those portions of the civil service act applicable to him in any given factual circumstance. We find no provision of Tacoma's Civil Service Ordinance or Board Rules implementing the ordinance, nor has any been directed to us, which requires the head of a department, when notifying an employee that he is being returned to a position in his former classification during his probationary period, to also notify the employee of any reasons for such action. Accordingly, the action of Officer Kowalski's department head did not violate any fundamental right to which Officer Kowalski was entitled.
The superior court had no jurisdiction to review the action taken by the officials of the City of Tacoma in this matter. Judgment is therefore affirmed.
PEARSON, C.J., and ARMSTRONG, J., concur.