2015-UNAT-548, Khaleel
UNAT held that it was satisfied that the rejection of the application as not receivable was correct on the basis that the Appellant did not seek decision review within the mandatory time period, which meant that UNRWA DT was precluded in law from considering the merits of his application. UNAT held that the Appellant did not identify how the UNRWA DT judgment was in any way defective or demonstrated that UNRWA DT erred in relation to its jurisdiction or committed an error of fact or law or procedure such as would warrant intervention by UNAT. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.
The Applicant contested the decision to separate him for abandonment of post. UNRWA DT dismissed the application as not receivable.
UNDT has no jurisdiction to waive deadlines for management evaluation or administrative review.