IN THE MATTER OF SENIOR TRAINING TECHNICIAN (PC2241C), PASSAIC COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Annotate this Case

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1344-04T11344-04T1

IN THE MATTER OF SENIOR

TRAINING TECHNICIAN (PC2241C),

PASSAIC COUNTY BOARD OF

SOCIAL SERVICES

__________________________________

 

Submitted December 7, 2005 - Decided

Before Judges Skillman and Payne.

On appeal from Merit System Board, Docket No. 2005-134.

De Yoe, Heissenbuttel & Buglione, attorneys for appellant (Albert C. Buglione, on the brief).

Peter C. Harvey, Attorney General, attorney for respondent Merit System Board (Patrick DeAlmeida, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Andrea R. Grundfest, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

The Passaic County Board of Social Services (PCBSS) appeals from an October 8, 2004, final decision of the Merit System Board that ordered the PCBSS to add Mahasen Adra-Halwani to the list of eligibles for the position of Senior Training Technician, with the ranking 4A on that list, and to make any permanent appointments from that revised list. The PCBSS presents the following arguments:

I. MERIT BOARD'S DECISION DATED OCTOBER 8, 2004 SHOULD BE OVERTURNED AS THE DECISION VIOLATED LEGISLATIVE POLICY.

II. MERIT SYSTEM BOARD'S DECISION IN THIS MATTER WAS ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS AND UNREASONABLE.

a. Merit Board's Interpretation of N.J.A.C. 4A:4-1.4(a) is incorrect.

b. The interpretation of N.J.A.C. 4A:4-1.4(a) by the Merit Board prejudices the prior appointed eligibles.

c. Applicable case law supports the position that Ms. Adra-Halwani should have been added to a current certified list of eligibles instead of creating a new revised list.

d. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.7 does not permit returning permanently placed eligibles to a certified list.

 
We reject these arguments and affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in the Merit System Board's October 8, 2004 final decision.

Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-1344-04T1

December 20, 2005

 


Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.