¹ú²úAV

UNAT held that, in protesting against the non-inclusion of his Transitional Personal Allowance in his retirement benefit, the Appellant had failed to appreciate the distinction between an allowance and base salary. UNAT held that UNRWA DT correctly found that under the applicable Staff Rules, the Appellant’s retirement benefit did not include the Transitional Personal Allowance. UNAT found no error in the UNRWA DT’s finding that the Appellant had not submitted a timely request for decision review with respect to his allegation of impropriety of his transfer and that therefore that claim was not receivable. UNAT held that the issue of unjust treatment in his job applications had not been raised before UNRWA DT and could not be introduced for the first time on appeal, and, as such, was not receivable. UNAT held that the Appellant failed to establish that UNRWA DT fell into any error of law or fact in arriving at its decision and thus his appeal has no merit and could not succeed. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.