¹ú²úAV

UNAT held that the Appellant failed to establish that the UNDP decision to contact the Pakistani Government directly to enquire about its deputation policy was improperly motivated. With regard to the new communication upon which the Appellant wished to rely, UNAT held that it was new evidence, for which leave was required, in order to adduce it before UNAT. UNAT did not find any exceptional circumstances existed to require it to consider the new evidence. UNAT held that UNDT did not err in taking into consideration the conditions governing the Appellant’s deputation in order to determine his probable period of appointment with UNDP. UNAT held that UNDT correctly determined that it would not be appropriate to order the Appellant’s reinstatement. UNAT held that UNDT correctly assessed the compensation for pecuniary damages and declined to enhance the compensation. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.