Opinion
August 1, 1961
Present — Bergan, P.J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds Taylor, JJ.
Appeal from an order of a Special Term of the Supreme Court, Albany County. Petitioners are in the competitive class of the civil service and hold positions in the Kings County Surrogate's Court. In 1960 the respondent State Civil Service Commission adopted a classification plan for the positions held by petitioners, and others, embracing new titles and job specifications; and this was approved by the Surrogate. Petitioners argue that the classifications thus made are invalid because of the absence of approval by the Governor. The Special Term held that gubernatorial approval was unnecessary. Approval of the Governor is required for "rules and regulations" including "rules" for the jurisdictional classification of positions; "rules" for examinations, promotions, etc., of employees; and "rules" for "position classification and jurisdictional classification" of employees made by the commission. (Civil Service Law, § 6, which applies to Kings County.) It is not disputed that the reclassification of petitioners' positions was made in pursuance of a valid rule. The narrow issue is whether the reclassification itself is a "rule" which requires approval by the Governor. We are of opinion that the classification of positions pursuant to a valid rule differs from a "rule" described in section 6 in respect of the formality of adoption; and that the actual reclassification here effected was not a "rule" but an administrative act. Moreover, the petitioners are not aggrieved. They remain solidly in their jobs and in the classified service; no salary change is made as to any of them; and except as to two, no change is made in duties under the new job specifications. As to those two, the possibility the new job description, if carried out literally, might deprive them of the duty of signing the Surrogate's name to certain papers, seems to us to show no grievance of which a court would take recognizance in a proceeding against the commission; and no possible injury or adverse effect to civil service status, salary or otherwise, is demonstrated by such a deprivation if it actually occurs. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs.