Civil Servant Loses Appeal: Transfer of “Security Risk”

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 July 1950, Page 8

Civil Servant Loses Appeal: Transfer of “Security Risk”

WELLINGTON, July 27 (P.A.)—An appeal by Gilbert Maxmillian Deynzer against a Supreme Court decission refusing him an injunction to restrain the Public Service Commission from transferring him from one Government department to another was dismissed by the Court of Appeal today. The Chief Justice (Sir Humphrey O’Leary) and Mr Justice Finlay held against Deynzer, and the other two members of the Court, Mr Justice Gresson and Mi’ Justice Hutchinson, As the Court was evenly divided, the decision of Mr Justice Northcroft against which he appealed was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

Welfare Of State

| The Chief Justice, in holding that the Public Service Commission had power to transfer an officer from one department to another without qualification, said that the welfare of the State must be the dominant consideration in the relationship between servants and the Crown. | “As in England, public servants are ■at common law employed and dismissed at will, he said. “The Crown cannot hamper by contract the inter- • ests of the community. In New Zealand the position is complicated bei cause the Crown by legislation has passed its rights to the Public Service Commission and no longer has direct control of public servants.” The Chief Justice added, however, that section 51 of the Public Service : Act, 1912, was sufficient basis for dis--1 missal with three months’ notice, but : the public Service Commission had not adopted that procedure. It had decided that Deynzer was not a good security risk, and it must be presumed by the Court that the commission in transferring him used its powers wisely and reasonably. “Recent happenings in England and America make it clear that the course taken by the commission was a prudent one,” he said.

Reason for Transfer

Deynzer was a member of the staff of the Scientific and Industrial Research Department for five years. He was transferred to the. Social Security Department in November, .1948, allegedly because when asked by the commission whether he was a Communist he declined to answ'er, saying that in his view public servants were entitled to maintain their own counsel on their private political views. Although agreeing that the right of transfer was an implied term of Deynzer’s engagement, Mr Justice Gresson and Mr Justice Hutchinson held that he had a right of appeal and that consequently an injunction should have been granted.