المملكة: Due to the “agent’s” mistake, the “administrative” department refuses to pay the “psychiatric allowance” to a health employee – urgent

It ruled The Administrative Court rejected the lawsuit of an employee in a mental health hospital in Al-Ahsa Governorate who requested payment of the “psychiatric allowance” differences of 30%.

It confirmed that the lawsuit was not accepted in form due to a procedural error in submitting the mandatory grievance through the “Masar” platform in the name of the agent instead of the right holder, a ruling that was upheld by the Administrative Court of Appeal for not meeting the regulatory conditions.

And the events of The legal dispute by asking the employee to oblige his employer to pay his financial entitlements, represented by the allowance for workers in hospitals and psychiatric clinics, with retroactive effect starting from the date he officially began his job duties.

The plaintiff based his claim on his legal entitlement to the prescribed allowance, but the legal obstacle he faced was the method of submitting the prior grievance to the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Development, which is a basic condition for accepting the lawsuit.

The merits of the ruling revealed that the plaintiff’s agent submitted the grievance via the “Masar” digital platform, using his name and personal data, instead of submitting the grievance in the name of the plaintiff employee, which led to a faltering administrative procedure.

This step resulted in the Ministry’s inability to study the application or verify the employee’s job data, as the competent authority’s response was that the grievance was not clear due to the absence of the information necessary to link the application and the actual job holder.

The court stressed in its reason for the ruling that the system of pleadings before the Diwan Grievances: Establishing a mandatory grievance as a fundamental step aimed at enabling the administrative body to correct its mistakes amicably and reduce the flow of cases to the courts.

She explained The Judicial Department Submitting a grievance in the name of the agent empties the legal text of its purpose, as it is considered non-existent because it did not enable the administrative body to examine the employee’s entitlement effectively and accurately.

The judicial ruling confirmed that the validity of the formal procedures precedes consideration of the matter, and that the grievance must be in the name of the right holder himself to ensure the fulfillment of the statutory requirements that allow the defect to be addressed before resorting to the judiciary.

The administrative judiciary, with the support of the Court of Appeal, ended in not accepting the lawsuit. Formally, this establishes an important principle of the necessity of careful adherence to the procedural process when claiming job rights to ensure that they are not lost for formal reasons.