The Federal Supreme Court rejected a federal government court ruling against a judgment that it was required to pay 347,000 dirhams for end of service benefits to one of its employees. The court confirmed in the ruling that the employee's term of office was continuous and not divided into two periods, as his employer claims.
In detail, a civil servant filed an administrative action against his government employer, requesting that an expert be assigned to determine the end of service benefits while reserving his right to determine his claim after experience.
"He worked as a computer programmer from December 1982 until the end of his service in February 2015," he said.
After the court ordered an expert to order the employer to pay the plaintiff 180,000 dirhams, the Court of Appeal decided to amend the amount to 347,779 dirhams.
"The referee violated the law and erred in its application in deciding that the plaintiff's service was a related service, and therefore spent the amount awarded on this basis, while the plaintiff's work was in two stages, each stage has legal rules to regulate, The end of service and the failure to pay the end of service benefit to the employee after the end of each period of service is not the approved standard of service being continuous or connected, and therefore the administration has conducted the calculation of receivables according to the regulations for each period.
The Federal Supreme Court rejected the appeal, stating that "it is decided and what has been done by this court that once the law clearly and clearly regulates the functional relationship between the administration and its employees, the parties to the relationship may not agree on what is contrary to them. The employment relationship between the administration and the employee is terminated only by one of the reasons specified by the law. The decision is made by the management by virtue of a decision issued by it. This decision constitutes the legal basis for paying the employee the amounts due from the contract of employment, including end of service benefits. To contract or include conditions for a subsequent contract that does not separate him from the first contract for a period of time. If the employee's position changes from system to system in his work, this does not constitute evidence of termination of employment contract as long as the relationship between the parties does not cease and the employee receives his dues from his first contract. Of the reasons for termination of service specified in the law exclusively ».
She pointed out that the fixed papers and the assertion by the defendant in her memoirs that the plaintiff worked in its interests from 1982 to 2015, and there is no decision to terminate his service during this period, or that he received his dues from the end of his service during the period, , And the rulings of the Federal Supreme Court have been settled.