Statute of limitations on disciplinary power against an interim teacher's dismissalPrescripción de la potestad disciplinaria frente a un cese de interinidad docente

**FILE:** **16-010738-1027-CA - 8** **PROCEEDING:** COGNIZANCE AND PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE **PLAINTIFF:** Name12949 **DEFENDANT:** THE STATE **RESOLUTION No. 39-2019 - VI** **CONTENTIOUS-ADMINISTRATIVE AND CIVIL TREASURY TRIBUNAL - SIXTH SECTION - SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF SAN JOSÉ.** Goicoechea, at eleven hours fifty minutes on the fifth of April, two thousand nineteen.- Proceeding of pure law, filed by Name12949, holder of identity card number CED10346, represented by Rolando Segura Ramírez, as special judicial attorney-in-fact, against THE STATE, represented by Marianella Barrantes Zamora, in her capacity as Procuradora.- **WHEREAS:** **I.- PRELIMINARY ASPECTS, DELIBERATION AND VOTE.-** As of October 8 of last year, Law No. 9342, corresponding to the total reform of the Civil Procedure Code, entered into force, which in turn is the normative body that regulates the formalities of jurisdictional resolutions; therefore, this judgment adapts to the new legal provisions, as observed in Transitory Provision I of said Law and in accordance with Article 2.18 of the Full Court circular number 96-2018 "Practical Rules for the Application of the New Civil Procedure Code," adopted in article XII of session number 38-18 of August 13, 2018. Likewise, the parties are made aware that because the matter being resolved was partially processed digitally, it is hereby noted that the records also conform to the provisions of the regulation on the Electronic Judicial File before the Judicial Branch, approved by the Full Court in article XXXI of session No. 22-13, held on May 20, 2013. In accordance with articles 10 and 11 of said Regulation, it is clarified that if a folio number or image of any document belonging to the judicial file is cited, it refers to physical or scanned folios prior to the entry into operation of the electronic file in the Office. To refer to documents entered after that time, only their date of presentation or production will be indicated. Equally, and in accordance with the principle of functional equivalence established in article 11 of that Regulation, the parties are made aware that the use of digital extracts of digitized documents provided by the parties to the judicial file is in accordance with the Law, since according to that rule "…they have the same probative force as the originals…". Finally, it is recorded that this resolution is issued after the respective deliberation was carried out, with the drafting of the vote by the reporting judge, Judge Aguilar Méndez, with the concurring opinion and vote of judges Garita Navarro and Silvia Fernández.- **II.- EVIDENCE FOR BETTER DECISION.-** Articles 82.1 and 110 of the Contentious-Administrative Procedure Code, in relation to 41.3 of the Civil Procedure Code (Law No. 9342), grant the Deciding Tribunal broad powers to incorporate the evidence it deems appropriate, whether or not the parties have made a formal proposal for it, once the opportune procedural moments for doing so have concluded (in the case of the contentious-administrative process, understood as with the complaint, the answer to the complaint, the hearing for counter-evidence or reply, and in the preliminary hearing). In that sense, by resolution issued at 15:19 hours on March 20 last, this Tribunal deemed it of interest for the resolution of this matter to have in the evidentiary community the corresponding document with personnel action number 201605-MP-2079381 dated November 15, 2016, contributed to the records with the State's answer to the request for a precautionary measure, given that said element was not part of the list of evidence admitted at the preliminary hearing. In accordance with the aforementioned powers, a hearing was granted to the parties to guarantee the contradictory process and, with it, respect for the rights of defense and due process, with none of the parties having opposed its admission. That being the case, this Tribunal deems that said evidence is pertinent for the purposes of resolving this process, because it contains relevant information about the period of the plaintiff's appointment. Consequently, what corresponds in Law is to admit this ex officio evidence as evidence for better decision, thus incorporating it into the evidentiary common pool, in order to be able to give it the value that corresponds in accordance with the substantive analysis that will be carried out hereinafter.- **III.- -OBJECT OF THE PROCESS AND ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES.-** In the specific case, the plaintiff has brought an action whose claims, as determined in the preliminary hearing held on June 16, 2014, consist of the following: "…PETITION ON THE MAIN PROCESS: Based on the arguments of fact and Law presented, I request your Authority to grant the following: 1. That the absolute nullity of the administrative act issued by the Minister of Public Education through resolution 1532-2016 at 14:00 hours on May 5, 2016, be declared, as well as the absolute nullity of resolution 2444-2016 at 8:00 hours on July 6, 2016, issued by the Acting Minister of Education, and that by connection, the prior and subsequent acts that depend on these acts be invalidated. 2. That the existence of the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the action to exercise the Administration's disciplinary power over my client, which was attempted to be exercised through administrative acts 1532-2016 and 2444-2016 issued by the Ministry of Public Education, be declared. 3. As a result of the declaration of nullity requested, that the reinstatement of Mr. Name12949 to the position of Teacher be ordered, and that he be recognized the amounts consisting of back pay and salary differences that he has not received as a result of the loss of his appointment. 4. That the damages (daños y perjuicios) caused as a direct and immediate consequence of the illegal act of dismissal of my client from his position be compensated; as well as procedural and personal costs and their respective interest…". The plaintiff bases these requests on the following arguments: 1.- He considers that, in accordance with article 603 of the Labor Code, in its version in effect at the date of the facts, the Administration's exercise of the disciplinary power had prescribed; 2.- Violation of the rights to due process and defense, for the following reasons: a) the initial act of the procedure lacks a statement of reasons, b) the presumption of accepting the charges, c) the indication of the pertinent remedies was omitted, d) a sui generis administrative procedure was applied; and 3.- Defects in the grounds of the act, since a justified and verified cause for the absence did exist, which was communicated in a timely manner to the Management, and which, in any case, did not constitute any serious fault warranting the application of the most severe sanction. For its part, the State's representation answered negatively and thus opposed the exception of lack of Right, arguing that the legally established procedure was applied, after verification of the imputed fault, that is, unjustified absences from work, without any communication or immediate knowledge by the employer of these circumstances, pursuant to the provisions of article 8.b) of the Regulation to the Teaching Career Law. It adds that evidence of the irresponsibility in the plaintiff's behavior is his carelessness in addressing the formal statement of charges (traslado de cargos) of the disciplinary procedure in a timely manner, which he answered late. It states that the issue of the statute of limitations was addressed in the administrative procedure and that, furthermore, there has been a lack of credibility in the various reasons given by him in an attempt to justify himself. It concludes that in this case, the dismissal carried out was ordered by the competent body, through a reasoned and properly notified resolution, rendering the filed lawsuit, including the damages claimed, unfounded. It requests that the lawsuit be declared without merit and that Name12949 be ordered to pay both court costs.- **IV.- PROVEN FACTS.-** Of importance for the issuance of this resolution, the following facts are considered duly demonstrated, either because they are contained in the evidence provided in the file or because the parties have so accepted:

• 1)Mr. Name12949 was provisionally appointed to occupy position number 433464 in the Ministry of Public Education, for the period from February 1, 2016, to January 31, 2017, in the position of Technical Professional Education Teacher assigned to the schools Linda Vista, code 2718, and San Isidro, code 2869, belonging to the Education circuit number 04-Miramar, Montes de Oro, Puntarenas, of the Regional Directorate (Dirección1590) (uncontested facts, ff. 14 and 15 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 2) Mr. Name12949 did not report to work on February 9 to 12, 2016 (uncontested facts, ff. 1 to 14 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 3) Through official letter number ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016, dated February 17, 2016, the directors of the schools Linda Vista and San Isidro of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas, Messrs. Luis Ángel Jiménez González and Henry Otárola Zamora, respectively, communicated to the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education the non-attendance of Mr. Name12949 at said educational centers (f. 14 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 4) By administrative resolution number 678-2016 at 09:20 hours on February 25, 2016, the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education issued the initial act and the designation of official Lizbeth Acosta Campos as the directing body of the administrative disciplinary procedure against official Name12949, by virtue of the absences described above as had been reported to it by the directors of the schools Linda Vista and San Isidro (f. 17 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 5) By resolution dated February 29, 2016, the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education issues the formal statement of charges to official Name12949, in which it charges him with the absences from work and imputes them as serious faults that could result in a sanction that "…could range from a suspension without pay of up to 30 days, to the cessation of the provisional appointment without employer responsibility…". Likewise, in said act, he is summoned to exercise his right of defense within a period of ten working days pursuant to article 69 of the Civil Service Statute (ff. 18 and 19 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 6) Through emails sent by official Lisbeth Acosta Campos, in her capacity as instructor of the disciplinary procedure, at 11:13 a.m. on Dirección1592 and 11:41 a.m. on Monday, March 28, both dates in 2016 (ff. 24 and 22 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949), addressed to officials Henry Otárola Zamora and Luis Ángel Jiménez, directors of the schools Linda Vista and San Isidro of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas, she communicated to them that they should proceed with the notification of the formal statement of charges to official Name12949, as can be seen in the following digital extracts of the documents described here:--------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 7) At 7:10 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on March 29, 2016, the formal statement of charges within the administrative disciplinary procedure followed against him was notified to official Name12949 at the educational centers San Isidro and Linda Vista, respectively (see notification certificates on folios 30 and 33 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 8) On April 15, 2016, a writing was received in the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education from the official here as Name12949 in which he proceeded to answer the charges in question (uncontested fact and f. 34 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 9) By administrative resolution number 1532-2016 at 14:00 hours on May 5, 2016, the Minister of Public Education resolved: "…To cease the provisional appointment of server Name12949, whose details are known in the record, without liability for the State, for having been accredited that he incurred serious faults in the exercise of his duties…". This act was notified to Mr. Name12949 on May 23, 2016 (ff. 39 to 35 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 10) On May 25, 2016, a motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed by Mr. Name12949 against resolution No. 1532-2016 was received in the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education (uncontested fact and f. 46 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); 11) By administrative resolution No. 2444-2016 at 08:00 hours on July 6, 2016, the Acting Minister of Public Education resolved the motion for reconsideration filed in the following terms: "….I. Declare without merit the exception of statute of limitations raised in the appeal brief dated May 25, 2016, by server Name12949 […] II. Declare without merit the Appeal for Reconsideration (Recurso de Revisión) filed by server Name12949 against Resolution No. 1532-2016…". This act was notified to Mr. Name12949 on July 26, 2016 (uncontested fact and ff. 52 to 47 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Name12949); and 12) On May 13, 2016, Mr. Name12949 was dismissed from position No. 433464 that he held on a provisional basis (see personnel action No. 201605-MP-2079381 dated November 15, 2016, admitted as evidence for better decision).- **V.- UNPROVEN FACTS.-** For the purposes of this judgment, the following facts are considered not proven, either because the parties failed to meet their burdens of proof or because the Office found no suitable evidence that, in light of sound judgment (sana crítica), would allow them to be credited:

1.- The extension for more than twenty years of the public employment relationship held between Mr. Name12949 and the State, through the Ministry of Public Education, in which the former served as a teacher on a provisional basis; 2.- The exact date on which the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education received official letter number ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016, dated February 17, 2016, signed by the directors of the schools Linda Vista and San Isidro of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas; and 3.- The existence and quantification of economic items of the public employment relationship held between Mr. Name12949 and the State, other than the unearned wages and their monetary adjustment, to which he would have been entitled as a result of the unjustified cessation of his provisional appointment.- **VI.- ON THE TEMPORAL ELEMENT IN THE EXERCISE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIVE POWERS OF A DISCIPLINARY NATURE.-** In employment relationships, the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power of the superior over officials who have committed sanctionable faults is subject to a temporality factor, after which, such exercise may not be undertaken. This temporal limit, as will be seen, varies depending on the regulated subject matter and the existence of a special legal regime that establishes particular rules for specific types of public employment relationships. Consequently, we can affirm that this disciplinary power (which is based on the doctrine of article 102 of the General Public Administration Act (LGAP)) is not unrestricted in time. Unlike other public powers that, due to finalistic aspects, are considered imprescriptible -e.g., protection of public domain assets-, those referring to internal sanctioning exercise -such as the one examined in this case- are subject to temporality rules by virtue of which they may expire due to the passage of the time established by the legal system without being exercised. Therefore, in this type of relationship, the holder of the disciplinary or corrective power is the administrative superior and the passive subject is the public official, who, to that extent, is subject to the internal corrective power only for the period expressly set by the applicable regulations, upon expiration of which, their power to demand recognition of the loss of the hierarchical power emerges. It is a matter left to the discretion of the legislator, who determines in each case whether it is a statute of limitations (prescripción) or a lapsing (caducidad) of the eventual exercise of those powers. From this plane, in the liberatory statute of limitations, the concurrence of three fundamental factors is required, namely: a) inertia of the holder of a right in its exercise, b) passage of the time fixed by the legal system in that inertia of the holder and; c) pleading or exception by the passive subject of the legal relationship to invoke the statute of limitations. However, in matters of public employment, the negative statute of limitations may well be alleged as a ground for nullity of the final sanctioning act, even if that defense had not been exercised prior to the issuance of the public will. Thus, the disciplinary or corrective power cannot be considered an imprescriptible one, trying to justify that deduction in the rule of article 66.1 of the LGAP, but rather it is one subject to preclusion rules due to temporal factors, as visualized in subsection 3) of that same article 66 LGAP. Likewise, regarding actions of the Public Administration in sanctioning administrative procedures, what is established by article 329.3 of the LGAP, which states: "3. The final act issued outside the time limit shall be valid for all legal purposes, unless otherwise provided by law," is fundamental. So, when a legal provision fixes the loss or preclusion of competence, the act issued in exercise of that already-expired power could not be considered valid. In that sense and within the general framework of the statute of limitations for corrective and disciplinary power, this Section of the Contentious-Administrative Tribunal has been consistent in considering that there are various scenarios or rules for the temporal exercise of these powers. This differentiation, which, incidentally, is based on the phase of the procedure in question, allows for a more precise approach to the subject under discussion, since indeed, the legal system grants different treatment according to these stages as the temporal limit for the exercise of said power varies, in accordance with the characteristic notes of each one. In that sense and returning to the specific case, the plaintiff's representation has, in its case theory, restricted the claim of the statute of limitations on the disciplinary power to a supposed paralysis of the procedure occurring at its beginning, from the date on which the disciplined events occurred or, alternatively, from the moment the competent body had knowledge of the fault and the notification of the formal statement of charges; that is, we are facing a possible situation of the statute of limitations on the exercise of the disciplinary power. This scenario refers to the deadline set by the legal system for the holder of the internal corrective power to adopt the procedural measures for the case and allow them to issue the final decision. On this plane, it is the maximum deadline set by the legal system for the administrative superior to order the opening of the pertinent procedure, aimed at establishing the pertinence or not of imposing a sanction. In this way, the notification of the opening of the procedure that seeks the establishment of the facts (material truth) that serve as the basis for the grounds of the act, generates an interrupting effect on that margin of temporality, insofar as it consists of an express act and a measure that directly aims at the exercise of that power. It could not be considered that the aforementioned deadline for exercising the power is only interrupted by the issuance of the final act, since as a derivation of the principle of due process, it is necessary for the Administration to order the opening of an administrative cause to establish whether or not the sanction should be imposed, as a derivation of what is established in articles 214, 221, 297, and 308 of the LGAP. In this hypothesis and in the consideration of this Chamber, the disciplinary power of the administrative superior is subject to a prescriptive period, which is regulated in article 603 of the Labor Code (applicable by express referral of canon 51 of the Civil Service Statute –ESC-), a rule in force at the time of the facts and in accordance with Transitory Provision II of Law No. 9343 of January 25, 2016, the "Labor Procedure Reform" law. The article in question says: "…The rights and actions of employers to justifiably dismiss workers or to discipline their faults prescribe in one month, which shall begin to run from the time cause for the separation arose or, where appropriate, from the time the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction became known…" (Highlighting is not from the original). In this way, we can affirm that the period for the statute of limitations on the disciplinary power to operate is indeed one month, which is necessarily interrupted by the effective communication of the formal statement of charges to the interested party. It should be clarified that the foregoing is without prejudice to faults that are regulated by special norms, such as those expressed by the internal control regime, probity in public service, and public finance management, in which, according to the regulations of the General Internal Control Law, No. 8292 (art. 43), the Law against Corruption and Illicit Enrichment in Public Service, No. 8422 (art. 44), and article 71 of the Organic Law of the Comptroller General of the Republic, No. 7428, a special period operates, according to the scenarios and from the moments those norms provide. However, the starting point for the calculation of that prescriptive period is decisive. On this point, article 603 of the Labor Code indicates that the period runs from the time the cause for separation arose or, failing that, from the time the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction became known. In this sense, the period is calculated from the moment the holder of the corrective power is in an objective possibility of knowing the fault and, therefore, undertaking the exercise of their power. Therefore, when the particularities of the case require the performance of a prior stage of preliminary investigation, the alluded period runs from the moment the results of that exercise are brought to the knowledge of the superior. This is also the case for faults that are evidenced in Internal Audit reports, but whose pursuit for sanctioning purposes must be submitted to the respective superior. In such a scenario, the indicated period is calculated from the moment of receipt or effective communication of said report to the superior, since it is only at that moment that said holder can validly adopt decisions regarding the opening or not of disciplinary proceedings. Nevertheless, the need for that phase (preliminary investigation) must be discriminated in each case, since otherwise, it could be used as a strategy to evade the statute of limitations, given that not in all scenarios would that investigation be necessary, but only those in which, due to the particularities of the case, it is indispensable to determine the pertinence or not of opening the sanctioning procedure, or to gather indications that aim to clarify its necessity or not. Regarding the relationships regulated by the Teaching Career Regime, Title II of the Civil Service Statute (ESC), that normative framework establishes a procedure for handling complaints that could provide a basis for the imposition of the disciplinary regime. In that sense, article 65 of the ESC establishes that any complaint or denunciation must be submitted to the immediate superior of the involved agent, who, depending on the severity of the alleged fault, will reserve it for their own knowledge or will refer it to the Personnel Department of the Ministry of Public Education, which, in the event that it "…finds merit, will order the immediate investigation of charges…". These actions can also be initiated ex officio. Meanwhile, according to article 66 ejusdem, if the alleged fault could imply a written warning, the immediate superior may propose to the Director of the Personnel Department that they resolve definitively. When the immediate superior learns of a fault that is not within their competence, they must refer the matter directly to the Personnel Department. In accordance with the provisions of article 69 of that legal body, when no merit results from the investigation of the case to continue with the proceedings, the Personnel Department, by reasoned act, may order the archiving of the file; otherwise, it must formulate the charges in writing, giving the public agent a period of 10 days, within which they must present their defense allegations. Once the evidence is substantiated (articles 70-71 ESC), the Personnel Department shall forward the file to the Teaching Career Tribunal so that this body may decide what corresponds -art. 71-, for which purpose, having verified the absence of nullities in the proceedings, it must issue its decision within 8 days, extendable. When the recommendation of the Teaching Career Tribunal is the dismissal of the official, in accordance with the provisions of mandate 75 of the ESC, once the referred procedures are completed, it is up to the Minister, within a period of one month (provided for in article 74 ibidem), to present the respective petition before the Civil Service Tribunal. The detail of this course makes it evident that the statute of limitations for initiating disciplinary actions is calculated from the moment the holder of that power is in an objective possibility (or duty) of its exercise. In the specific case, and given that the exact date on which the communication contained in official letter No. ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016 was received has not been demonstrated, it is the criterion of this Tribunal that the moment from which the aforementioned prescriptive period began to run occurred on February 25, 2016, the date on which the Human Resources Directorate issued the resolution initiating the administrative disciplinary procedure, a circumstance in which this Tribunal coincides that the Administration was objectively in the reasonable possibility of exercising the disciplinary power. In accordance with the rules for the calculation of deadlines established in the Civil Procedure Code, applicable on a supplementary basis, be it articles 146 of Law No. 7130 or 30.5 of Law No. 9342: "…Deadlines by years or months shall be calculated according to the calendar, that is, from date to date…", so that the period of one month expired on March 25, 2016, without any interruption thereof having occurred by that time through the practice of the notification of the formal statement of charges, which did not occur until March 29, that is, four days after the statute of limitations for the exercise of the disciplinary power had occurred. For this reason, the subsequent act through which the Minister of Public Education ordered the plaintiff's cessation was issued when that hierarchical instance no longer had the competence to do so, due to the expiry of the period to be able to exercise said power.

Regarding the thesis held by the State as part of its defense of lack of right (falta de Derecho), it is unfounded in the opinion of this Tribunal, because the plaintiff did plead the statute of limitations (prescripción) of the disciplinary power during the course of the administrative procedure, specifically during the appeal phase, in connection with the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) (proven fact number 9) and therefore, before a final administrative decision was in place; although it should be noted—as already indicated—that in this matter, raising it in the procedure is not essential as a requirement to decree the statute of limitations. In this way and as previously indicated, the disciplinary or corrective power whose exercise concluded with the issuance of the act by which Mr. Nombre12949 was removed from his interim appointment, decreed by administrative resolution number 1532-2016 of the Minister of Public Education at 14:00 on May 5, 2016, subsequently confirmed by the rejection of the motion for reconsideration filed by Mr. Nombre12949, through resolution No. 2444-2016 at 08:00 on July 6 of that same year, must be declared time-barred (prescrita), and consequently, what corresponds under Law is to declare the nullity (nulidad) of both acts, as the Administration lacked competence to issue that sanctioning act. By reason of the nullity declared, a ruling on the substantive allegations raised by the plaintiff is therefore omitted, as it would serve no purpose for this judgment.- VII.- ON REINSTATEMENT AND OTHER ASPECTS OF THE COMPLAINT.- As has been proven (proven fact number 01), Mr. Nombre12950 was appointed on an interim basis to position number 433464 located in the Ministry of Public Education, for the period between February 1, 2016, and January 31, 2017. Thus, the possibility of reinstatement in that type of position and the recognition of employment emoluments in relation to those future appointments is improper, precisely due to the provisional nature of the interim appointment. On this point, reference can be made to the reasons developed by the Court of Cassation for Administrative Litigation (Tribunal de Casación de lo Contencioso Administrativo) in decision number 82-F-TC-2013 at 14:00 on August 22, 2013, in which it heard the claim of an interim employee of the Judicial Branch, regarding whom the nullity of the removal act was ordered, as in the present case. On that occasion, that High Tribunal established: “…it is important to clarify that the consequence of the illegality of a dismissal is the reinstatement (restitución) of the official to the position they held, however, this rule must be applied exclusively to those employees who were occupying positions in property (en propiedad) and not on an interim basis. The appellant is correct on this point, even when indicating that the Tribunal improperly assessed official note no. 0251-DRL-11 from the Limón Regional Directorate, referring to the fact that Mrs. Nombre12951's appointment was until June 30, 2010. In this regard, it is clear that the interim official enjoys stability but of a relative nature, which translates to the fact that they have no subjective right to have the appointment extended indefinitely, so they would not have the right to reinstatement, at least during the time they were not appointed. The fact that her position had been extended since 2008 does not give her the right to be considered a permanent employee (servidora de tiempo indefinido), since her position was interim. Nor does a valid expectation exist that she would be appointed again, since it was equally foreseeable that upon her appointment's termination, the Organization would decide (by virtue of the problems she was accused of), not to renew her appointment. In fact, this is where the points this Chamber questions have weight; first, the OIJ should have taken care to appoint the titleholder of the position occupied by agent Nombre12951, especially if she was being questioned; or failing that, wait for her appointment to expire and dispense with her services (by a duly reasoned determination), since the interim employee had no right whatsoever to be appointed indefinitely; it was sufficient for the term to expire to terminate the employment relationship. In any case, acting otherwise did not give the OIJ the right to abruptly revoke the plaintiff's appointment (while it was in full effect); nor did it give Mrs. Nombre12951 the possibility of being reinstated in the position. Consequently, she would also not have the option of receiving salaries from the cessation of duties until effective reinstatement, since this latter possibility is improper because her appointment was until a specific date. What does correspond to her is compensation for the lost salaries, from the dismissal (May 13, 2010, according to official note 511-DG-10) until the end of her appointment (June 30, 2010), under the terms and conditions established in the judgment, that is, deducting the corresponding legal charges and indexing those sums…” (Highlighting not from the original). Consequently, reinstatement is improper as petitioned, since the legal situations that were created with the appointment act were subject to a term (sujetas a término) and therefore, upon its expiration, they ceased to exist, so it is not possible to grant what was requested. Finally, regarding compensation items, firstly, it must be clarified that as provided in Transitory provision I of Law N° 9343 (“Labor Procedural Reform”), as well as Article 98.2 CPCA, since the preliminary hearing in this case was held on May 23, 2017, that is, before said Law came into force, this ruling will be made in accordance with the rules prior to said reform, because this being a pure matter of law (puro Derecho), this Chamber considers that said hearing fulfills the role of the evidentiary hearing referred to in the transitory rule. Thus, what corresponds under Law pursuant to Articles 190 of the General Public Administration Law (Ley General de la Administración Pública), 44 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Civil), and 82 of the Labor Code, and given the lack of precision in their arguments, claims, and the respective demonstration by the plaintiff's representation—despite it constituting their procedural burden—both in the complaint and during the preliminary hearing, the State is ordered to pay compensation (“as damages”) equivalent to the lost salaries from May 13, 2016, until January 31, 2017, this concept comprising the periodic stipends (for example, base salary, bonuses (pluses), or other economic items) that would have corresponded to them during that period and according to the salary scale established by the legal system for the performance of the functions they were responsible for in position No. 433464 from which they were unjustly removed. From said sums must be deducted, if applicable, the amount relating to income tax on dependent personal activity (salary tax), which must be reported to the Ministry of Finance (Ministerio de Hacienda), as well as the amount pertaining to the contribution regime of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social), the retirement and pension system, and other salary deductions. As it is a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of the lost salaries, the indexation mechanism provided in Article 123 CPCA must be applied, from the moment those sums were due according to the Central Administration's salary payment calendar for those dates, until their effective payment, so that Mr. Nombre12949 may receive an updated payment, as well as to ensure that the respective deductions are made at present value. Given that the management of the information corresponding to these items is the responsibility of the respondent Administration and given that it did not provide this information to the record (dynamic burden of proof – Art. 41.1 CPC Law N° 9342), the order to pay these items must be made exceptionally in abstract terms, as authorized by Article 122.m.ii) CPCA, so that only its quantification is reserved for the judgment execution stage. Let the parties note that this ruling is without prejudice to the possibility that said items may be liquidated administratively, through alternative dispute resolution, or in a judicial forum (execution), with the Administration obligated to pay them regardless of the existence or not of a liquidation resolution from the judges of the judgment execution stage. No other economic item that could have arisen from the public employment relationship is granted, since the representation of Mr. Nombre12950 neither argued nor established a specific claim, nor provided suitable evidence to reliably prove the existence of any right they would have deserved to receive, all this pursuant to Articles 58.1.e), 82, and 119 CPCA, 41.1.1, 41.5, and 62.1 CPC (Law N° 9342), 82 of the Labor Code, 44 of the Civil Service Statute, and 190 and 196 LGAP.- VIII.- REGARDING THE CLAIMS AND OBJECTIONS RAISED.- In accordance with the reasoning set forth above, claims number one and two are upheld, and consequently, the absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) is declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 at 14:00 on May 5 and number 2444-2016 at 08:00 on July 6, both from the year 2016 and issued by the Office of the Minister of Public Education, by which Mr. Nombre12949 was removed from his interim appointment in position number 433464, precisely because the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power has elapsed. The petitions contained in claims number three and four are partially upheld, specifically, regarding the order to pay compensation consisting of the lost salaries and their monetary update (indexation), corresponding to the remaining period of the interim appointment that could not be received as a result of the administrative conduct whose invalidity and subsequent absolute nullity are hereby declared. The action is dismissed regarding the reinstatement sought, as the plaintiff's appointment term has expired, and regarding any other items for “damages”, given the interested party's failure to fulfill their respective procedural burden, specifically that of their due and precise allegation and verification, making it improper for this Tribunal to substitute its work, particularly based on Articles 119 CPCA and 61.2 CPC (Law N° 9342). Consequently, the defense of lack of right (falta de Derecho) raised by the representation of the State is partially proper, only regarding the aspects of the complaint that have been denied, and rejected regarding the rest; in such a way that what is correct under Law is to partially grant the action as hereby ordered.- IX.- ON COSTS AND INTEREST THEREOF.- In accordance with Articles 193 of the Administrative Contentious Procedural Code (Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo) and 73 of the Civil Procedural Code (Law N° 9342), the order to pay costs (costas) constitutes an obligation imposed on the losing party by the very fact of being so, for the benefit of the winning party, to reimburse the latter for the various categories of expenses listed therein. Both articles provide for various grounds for exempting this order, therefore, in the absence of arguments or evidence that would allow this Tribunal, in this specific case, to weigh and consider any of these grounds as proven, it is not possible to totally or partially exempt the losing party from the application of said maxim, so that in accordance with the cited rules, the proper course is to impose the order on the losing party. In supplementary application of the provisions of Articles 61.2, 62.1, and 76.1 of the Civil Procedural Code (Law N° 9342), since in this case the amount of the order is made in abstract terms and therefore, pending liquidation in the judgment execution phase, the determination of the amount of costs shall be carried out at that stage, taking as a basis the total amount of the order, as well as the liquidation and the corresponding evidence that must be provided to the record by the winning party. Regarding the claimed interest on costs, considering that this ancillary obligation is only proper once a principal liquid and due monetary obligation is unsatisfied (Articles 706, 773, and 1163 Civil Code) and to ensure that its recognition is guaranteed through the intangibility of res judicata, despite the fact that in this specific case a monetary debt meeting those characteristics does not yet exist, what corresponds is its granting also in abstract terms, subject to the eventual liquidation that the victorious party must submit at the appropriate procedural moment when those circumstances concur.- THEREFORE (POR TANTO):

THE DEFENSE OF LACK OF RIGHT (FALTA DE DERECHO) RAISED BY THE REPRESENTATION OF THE STATE IS PARTIALLY UPHELD.- Consequently, THE COMPLAINT FILED BY Nombre12949 AGAINST THE STATE IS PARTIALLY GRANTED. The absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) is therefore declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 at 14:00 on May 5 and number 2444-2016 at 08:00 on July 6, both from the year 2016 and issued by the Office of the Minister of Public Education, as the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power has elapsed. The State is ordered in abstract terms to pay compensation in favor of the plaintiff, equivalent to the lost salaries from May 13, 2016, until January 31, 2017, this concept comprising the periodic stipends (for example, base salary, bonuses (pluses), or other economic items) that would have corresponded to them during that period and according to the salary scale established by the legal system for the performance of the functions they were responsible for in position No. 433464. From said sums must be deducted, if applicable, the amount relating to income tax on dependent personal activity (salary tax), which must be reported to the Ministry of Finance (Ministerio de Hacienda), as well as the amount pertaining to the contribution regime of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social), the retirement and pension system, and other salary deductions. As it is a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of the lost salaries, the indexation mechanism provided in Article 123 CPCA must be applied, from the moment those sums were due according to the Central Administration's salary payment calendar for those dates. The exclusive quantification of these items is therefore reserved for the judgment execution stage.- The losing party is ordered to pay all costs (costas) and interest thereon in the terms set forth in Considering IX of this judgment.- The remaining claims are denied, as they are legally improper.- Notify.- Daniel Aguilar Méndez Roberto Garita Navarro Silvia Fernández Brenes DANIEL AGUILAR MENDEZ, DECISIONAL JUDGE ROBERTO GARITA NAVARRO, DECISIONAL JUDGE SILVIA FERNÁNDEZ BRENES, DECISIONAL JUDGE 1 In that regard, by resolution issued at 3:19 p.m. on the previous 20th of March, this Tribunal deemed it of interest for the resolution of this matter to have in the evidentiary record the corresponding document with the </span><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold\">personnel action number 201605-MP-2079381 dated 15 November 2016</span><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'\">, provided to the case file with the State's response to the request for a precautionary measure, given that said element was not part of the body of evidence admitted at the preliminary hearing. In accordance with the powers indicated above, the parties were granted a hearing in order to guarantee the adversarial principle and, with it, respect for the rights of defense and due process, with none of the parties having opposed its admission. Thus, it is deemed by the Tribunal that said evidence is pertinent for the purposes of resolving this proceeding, because it contains relevant information regarding the appointment period of the plaintiff. Consequently, what is appropriate in Law is to </span><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold\">admit this court-ordered evidence as evidence for better resolution (prueba para mejor resolver)</span><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'\">, with which it becomes incorporated into the evidentiary record, in order to be able to give it the weight that corresponds in accordance with the substantive analysis that will be conducted hereinafter.- **III.-** -- **SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PROCEEDING AND PARTIES' ARGUMENTS.-** In the specific case, the plaintiff has brought an action whose **claims (pretensiones)**, as determined at the preliminary hearing held on 16 June 2014, consist of the following: *“…PETITION REGARDING THE MAIN PROCEEDING: Based on the arguments of fact and Law set forth, I request your Authority to grant the following: 1. Declare the absolute nullity of the administrative act issued by the Minister of Public Education through resolution 1532-2016 at 2:00 p.m. on 5 May 2016, as well as declare the absolute nullity of resolution 2444-2016 at 8:00 a.m. on 6 July 2016 issued by the Acting Minister of Education, and by connection, suppress the prior and subsequent acts that depend on these acts. 2. Declare the existence of the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the action to exercise the disciplinary power of the Administration over my client, which was attempted to be exercised through administrative acts 1532-2016 and 2444-2016 issued by the Ministry of Public Education. 3. As a result of the requested declaration of nullity, order the reinstatement to the position of Teacher of Mr. Nombre12949 , and recognize the amounts consisting of payment of back pay (salarios caídos) and salary differences he may not have received as a result of the loss of his appointment. 4. Compensate for the damages (daños y perjuicios) arising as a direct and immediate consequence of the illegal act of dismissal from the position of my client; as well as the procedural and personal costs (costas procesales y personales) and their respective interest…”.* The plaintiff bases these requests on the following **arguments (alegatos):** 1.- Considers that, in accordance with numeral 603 of the Labor Code, in its version in force at the date of the facts, the Administration's exercise of its disciplinary power had prescribed (prescribió); 2.- Violation of the rights to due process and defense, for the following reasons: a) the initial act of the proceeding lacks motivation, b) the presumption of having deemed him to have admitted the charges, c) the indication of the pertinent remedies was omitted, d) a *sui generis* administrative proceeding was applied; and 3.- Defects in the grounds of the act, given that there was a justified and verified cause for the absence, which was communicated to the Management in a timely manner, and that in any case, it did not constitute any serious misconduct that warranted the application of the most severe sanction. For its part, the representation of the **State** answered in the negative and, in this manner, raised the exception of **lack of right (falta de Derecho)**, arguing that the legally provided for procedure was indeed applied, upon prior verification of the attributed misconduct, that is, the unjustified absences from work, without the employer having immediate communication or knowledge of these circumstances, as provided in article 8.b) of the Regulation to the Law on the Teaching Career. It adds that a demonstration of the irresponsibility in the plaintiff's behavior is his carelessness in attentively responding in time to the notification of charges (traslado de cargos) of the disciplinary proceeding, which he answered late. It states that the matter of the statute of limitations (prescripción) was addressed in the administrative proceeding and that, furthermore, there has been a lack of credibility in the various reasons given by him to attempt to justify himself. It concludes that in this case, the dismissal carried out was ordered by the competent body, through a grounded resolution adequately notified, so the filed lawsuit is unfounded, including the claimed damages (daños y perjuicios). It requests that the lawsuit be declared without merit and that Nombre12950 be ordered to pay both costs (costas).- **IV.-** **PROVEN FACTS (HECHOS PROBADOS).-** Of importance for the issuance of this resolution, the following facts are considered duly proven, either because they appear in the evidence provided in the case file or because the parties have accepted them as such:

**1)** Mr. Nombre12949 , was temporarily appointed to occupy position number 433464 in the Ministry of Public Education, for the period from 01 February 2016 to 31 January 2017, in the position of Technical Professional Education Teacher and assigned to the Linda Vista, code 2718 and San Isidro, code 2869 schools, belonging to Education circuit number 04-Miramar, Montes de Oro, Puntarenas, of the Directorate1590 (non-controverted facts, pp. 14 and 15 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); **2)** Mr. Nombre12949 did not report to work on 09 to 12 February 2016 (non-controverted facts, pp. 1 to 14 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); **3)** Through official communication number ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016, dated 17 February 2016, the directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas, Messrs. Luis Ángel Jiménez González and Henry Otárola Zamora, respectively, communicated to the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education the absence of Mr. Nombre12949 from said educational centers (p. 14 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); **4)** Through administrative resolution number 678-2016 at 9:20 a.m. on 25 February 2016, the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education issued the initial act and designated official Lizbeth Acosta Campos as the directing body (órgano director) of the administrative disciplinary proceeding against official Nombre12949 , by virtue of the absences described above as had been informed by the Directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools (p. 17 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); **5)** Through resolution dated 29 February 2016, the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education issues a notification of charges (traslado de cargos) to official Nombre12949 , where it intimates his absences from work and attributes them to him as serious misconduct that could result in a sanction that *“…could range from a suspension without pay of up to 30 days, to the termination of the interim appointment without employer liability…”*. Likewise, in said act, he is summoned to exercise his right of defense within a period of ten business days in accordance with article 69 of the Civil Service Statute (pp. 18 and 19 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); **6)** Through emails sent by official Lizbeth Acosta Campos, in her capacity as instructor of the disciplinary proceeding, at 11:13 a.m. of the Directorate1591 and 11:41 a.m. on Monday, 28 March, both dates in the year 2016 (p.

24 and 22 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949), addressed to the officials Henry Otárola Zamora and Luis Ángel Jiménez, directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas, informed them that they had to proceed with the notification of the transfer of charges of the official Nombre12949, as can be seen in the following digital extracts of the documents described herein:--------------------- Considering I:

That Article 19 of Ley 7575, Ley Forestal, sets the following prohibitions:

• a)The cutting or exploitation of forest in national parks, biological reserves, mangroves, protected zones, and forest reserves, in accordance with the respective regulations.
• b)The cutting or exploitation of forest cover (cobertura boscosa) on lands with slopes greater than 45%, when this is determined by the General Directorate of Forestry, utilizing the corresponding slope map and criteria such as ecological fragility and the regulation of water flow.
• c)The cutting or exploitation of forest in areas designated as drinking-water catchment basins by the competent authorities.

Considering II:

That the sole exception to these prohibitions is when it is demonstrated, in a scientifically rigorous manner, that the land in question has a superior agricultural vocation and lacks forest cover (cobertura boscosa).

Considering III:

That, through Voto 4654-2003, the Constitutional Chamber declared Article 1 of Decree N° 31849-MINAE, which established a transitory provision for the application of Article 19 of the Ley Forestal, unconstitutional, as it violated the principle of lifetime tenure (irreductibilidad) of forest land.

Therefore:

I. The environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) is approved

II. The execution of earthworks (movimientos de tierra) is authorized

III. A forest easement (servidumbre forestal) is established, in accordance with Article 19 of the Ley Forestal

IV. It is informed that the project area is subject to the Land Use Plan of the ACOSA Conservation Area

V. In compliance with Law N° 7575, Pago de Servicios Ambientales (PSA) is not applicable for this project

It is reported that the project does not involve a land-use change (cambio de uso del suelo) as it maintains the current forest cover (cobertura boscosa).

The developer must submit a plan for the management of the forest easement (servidumbre forestal) to SINAC within thirty calendar days.

SETENA is informed so that it may proceed as it deems appropriate.

In accordance with Decreto N° 31849-MINAE, the corresponding Environmental Management Plan is annexed in Anexo 1.

The document is communicated to the interested party, and it is noted that an appeal for reversal and a hierarchical appeal may be filed against this resolution, in accordance with Article 19.

The corresponding technical report is contained in Anexo 2.

It is ordered to proceed with the registration of the environmental easement (servidumbre ambiental) in the National Registry.

<p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span></p><p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">-</span><img src="\" width=\"539\" height=\"379\" alt=\"\" style=\"-aw-left-pos:0pt; -aw-rel-hpos:column; -aw-rel-vpos:paragraph; -aw-top-pos:0pt; -aw-wrap-type:inline\" /></p><p style=\"margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%\"><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'\">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span></p><p style=\"margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%\"><span style=\"font-family:'Trebuchet MS'\">-</span><img src=" El análisis interno de riesgo técnico será realizado por un geólogo especializado. El estudio debe ser firmado por un profesional responsable, que deberá cumplir con los requisitos de la Ley 7575 y el Decreto Ejecutivo 25721. En el caso de ACOSA, el estudio de riesgo técnico deberá incorporar la evaluación del peligro por deslizamiento, utilizando la metodología de Mora y Vahrson, así como la evaluación del riesgo de inundación con base en los estudios del CNE y el IMN. Se deberá considerar la información cartográfica del IGN y los planes reguladores del INVU.

Se deberá realizar una evaluación de impacto ambiental (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) de acuerdo con los procedimientos establecidos por la SETENA. El estudio de impacto ambiental (EIA) debe incluir un inventario detallado de la cobertura boscosa (cobertura boscosa) y un análisis de cambio de uso del suelo (cambio de uso del suelo) en el área del proyecto. Si el proyecto implica el fraccionamiento (fraccionamiento) de terrenos, se deberá cumplir con el Reglamento de Fraccionamiento y presentar el plano de subdivisión (subdivisión) ante el INVU. Deberá respetarse la protección de los nacientes (nacientes) y sus zonas de protección, así como establecer las servidumbres (servidumbres) correspondientes para el libre acceso y mantenimiento de los recursos hídricos, de acuerdo con el principio de irreductibilidad (irreductibilidad).

Los compromisos ambientales adquiridos, tales como el Pago de Servicios Ambientales (PSA), deben ser respaldados mediante un contrato de PSA (PSA) con el Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento Forestal (FONAFIFO). Se deberá considerar la modalidad de PSAH (PSAH) si el área cumple con los criterios establecidos en el Decreto N° 31849-MINAE. El análisis deberá referirse a lo dispuesto en el Art. 19 de la Ley Forestal y lo estipulado en el Voto 4654-2003, Considerando III.

El polígono definido por los vértices anteriores constituye el área del proyecto. El expediente administrativo principal es el número 12345-2023. El informe final debe ser remitido a la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental (SETENA) para su revisión.

• 7)At 7:10 am and 5 pm on March 29, 2016, at the San Isidro and Linda Vista educational centers, respectively, the official Nombre12949 was notified of the statement of charges within the disciplinary administrative procedure being pursued against him (see notification records on folios 30 and 33 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949); 8) On April 15, 2016, a written submission from the official here Nombre12950 was received by the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education, in which he proceeded to answer the charges in question (uncontested fact and f.

34 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 9) By administrative resolution number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5, 2016, the Minister of Public Education resolved: “…To terminate the interim appointment, without liability to the State, of the servant Nombre12949 , of known particulars in the case file, for having been proven that he incurred in serious faults in the exercise of his duties…”. This act was notified to Mr. Nombre12949 on May 23, 2016 (f. 39 to 35 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 10) On May 25, 2016, a motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed by Mr. Nombre12950 against resolution no. 1532-2016 was received in the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education (undisputed fact and f. 46 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 11) By administrative resolution no. 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6, 2016, the Acting Minister of Public Education resolved the motion for reconsideration filed in the following terms: “….I. To reject the statute of limitations objection (excepción de prescripción) raised in the appeal brief dated May 25, 2016, by the servant Nombre12949 […] II. To reject the Motion for Review filed by the servant Nombre12949 , against Resolution No. 1532-2016…”. This act was notified to Mr. Nombre12949 on July 26, 2016 (undisputed fact and f. 52 to 47 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); and 12) On May 13, 2016, Mr. Nombre12949 was dismissed from position no. 433464 which he occupied on an interim basis (see personnel action no. 201605-MP-2079381 dated November 15, 2016, admitted as evidence for better resolution).- V.- UNPROVEN FACTS.- For the purposes of this judgment, the following facts are considered not proven, either because the parties failed to meet their evidentiary burdens, or because the Office did not find suitable evidence that, in light of sound judgment (sana crítica), would allow them to be credited:

1.- The extension for more than twenty years of the public employment relationship sustained between Mr. Nombre12949 and the State, through the Ministry of Public Education, in which the former served as a teacher on an interim basis; 2.- The exact date on which the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education received official letter number ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016, dated February 17, 2016, signed by the directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools of the Puntarenas Regional Directorate; and 3.- The existence and quantum of economic aspects of the public employment relationship sustained between Mr. Nombre12949 and the State, other than the lost wages and their monetary adjustment, to which he would have been entitled as a result of the unjustified termination of his interim appointment.- VI.- ON THE TIME ELEMENT IN THE EXERCISE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIVE POWERS OF A DISCIPLINARY NATURE.- In civil service relationships, the exercise of the hierarchical superior's disciplinary or corrective power (potestad disciplinaria) over officials who have committed sanctionable faults is subject to a temporality factor, after which such exercise cannot be undertaken. This time limit, as will be seen, varies depending on the regulated matter and the existence of a special legal regime that sets particular rules for specific types of public employment relationships. Consequently, we can affirm that this disciplinary power (potestad disciplinaria) (which is based on the doctrine of article 102 LGAP) is not unrestricted in time. Unlike other public powers that, for their purpose, are considered imprescriptible –e.g., protection of public domain assets (bienes demaniales)–, those referring to the internal sanctioning exercise –as the one examined in this case– are subject to temporality rules by virtue of which they can expire due to the lapse of time established by the legal system without being carried out. Therefore, in this type of relationship, the holder of the disciplinary or corrective power is the administrative hierarchical superior and the passive subject is the public official, who, to that extent, is subject to the internal corrective power (potestad correctiva) only for the period expressly set by the applicable regulations, after which his/her power to demand recognition of the loss of the hierarchical power emerges. This is a matter left to the discretion of the legislator, who determines in each case whether it constitutes a statute of limitations (prescripción) or a lapse (caducidad) of the eventual exercise of those powers. From this perspective, in liberatory prescription (prescripción liberatoria), the concurrence of three fundamental factors is required, namely: a) inaction by the holder of a right in its exercise, b) lapse of the time set by the legal system in that inaction by the holder and; c) allegation or objection by the passive subject of the legal relationship asserting the statute of limitations. However, in public employment matters, negative prescription (prescripción negativa) can well be alleged as a ground for nullity of the final sanctioning act, even if that defense had not been exercised prior to the issuance of the public will. Thus, the disciplinary or corrective power cannot be considered as imprescriptible, trying to justify that deduction on the rule of article 66.1 of the LGAP, but rather it is one subject to preclusion rules due to time factors, as visualized in subsection 3) of that same article 66 LGAP. Likewise, in the case of actions by the Public Administration in administrative sanctioning procedures, the provisions of article 329.3 of the LGAP are fundamental, stating: "3. The final act issued outside the time limit shall be valid for all legal purposes, unless otherwise provided by law." So that when a legal provision sets the loss or preclusion of jurisdiction, the act issued in exercise of that already expired power could not be considered valid. In this sense and within the general framework of the statute of limitations for corrective and disciplinary power, this Section of the Administrative Litigation Tribunal (Tribunal de lo Contencioso Administrativo) has been consistent in considering that there are various scenarios or rules for the temporal exercise of these powers. This differentiation, which incidentally takes as its basis the phase of the procedure at issue, allows a more precise approach to the topic under discussion, since indeed the legal system grants different treatment according to those stages, as the time limit for the exercise of said power varies according to the characteristic notes of each one. In this sense and returning to the specific case, the plaintiff's representation has come, in its theory of the case, to restrict the allegation of prescription of the disciplinary power to a supposed paralysis of the procedure occurring at its initiation, from the date on which the disciplined events occurred, or else, from the moment the competent body becomes aware of the fault and the notification of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos), that is, we are facing a possible situation of prescription of the exercise of the disciplinary power. This scenario refers to the period set by the legal system for the holder of the internal corrective power to adopt the procedural measures of the case that allow him/her to issue the final decision. At this level, it concerns the maximum period introduced by the legal system for the administrative hierarchical superior to order the opening of the pertinent procedure, aimed at establishing the relevance or not of imposing a sanction. Thus, the notification of the opening of the procedure that seeks to establish the facts (material truth - verdad real) that serve as the basis for the grounds of the act, generates an interrupting effect on that margin of temporality, to the extent that it consists of an express act and a measure that directly tends towards the exercise of that power. It could not be considered that the aforementioned period for the exercise of the power is only interrupted with the issuance of the final act, since as a derivation of the due process principle, it is necessary for the Administration to order the opening of an administrative case, to establish whether or not the sanction should be imposed, as a derivation of the provisions in articles 214, 221, 297 and 308 LGAP. In this hypothesis and in the consideration of this Chamber, the disciplinary power of the administrative hierarchical superior is subject to the statute of limitations period, which is regulated in article 603 of the Labor Code (applicable by express remission of canon 51 of the Civil Service Statute –Estatuto de Servicio Civil, ESC–), a norm in force at the time of the events and in accordance with the provisions in Transitory Provision II of Law No. 9343 of January 25, 2016, the “Labor Procedural Reform” Law. The article in question states: “…The rights and actions of employers to justifiably dismiss workers or to discipline their faults prescribe in one month, which shall begin to run from the date the cause for separation arose or, as the case may be, from the date the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction were known…” (Highlighting not in the original). In this way, we can affirm that indeed the period for the statute of limitations of the disciplinary power to operate is one month, which is necessarily interrupted by the effective communication of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos) to the interested party. It is worth clarifying that the foregoing is without prejudice to faults that are regulated by special norms, such as those expressed by the internal control regime, probity in public service, and management of public finances (hacienda pública), in which, according to the regulation by the General Internal Control Law, No. 8292 (art. 43), the Law against Corruption and Illicit Enrichment in Public Service, No. 8422 (art. 44) and article 71 of the Organic Law of the Comptroller General of the Republic, No. 7428, a special period operates according to the scenarios and from the moments those norms establish. Now, the starting point for calculating that prescriptive period is decisive. In this regard, article 603 of the Labor Code states that the period runs from when the cause for separation arose or, failing that, from when the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction were known. In this sense, the period is computed from the moment the holder of the corrective power is in an objective possibility of knowing the fault and, therefore, undertaking the exercise of his/her power. Therefore, when the particularities of the case require the completion of a prior preliminary investigation stage, the aforementioned period runs from the moment the results of that exercise are brought to the knowledge of the hierarchical superior. This is also the case for faults that are evidenced in Internal Audit reports, but whose prosecution for sanctioning purposes must be submitted to the respective hierarchical superior. In such a scenario, the indicated period is computed from the moment of receipt or effective communication of that report to the hierarchical superior, since it is only at that moment that this holder can validly adopt decisions regarding the opening or not of disciplinary measures. However, the need or not for that phase (preliminary investigation) must be discriminated in each case, because otherwise it could be used as a strategy to evade the statute of limitations, given that such investigation would not be necessary in all scenarios, but only in those where, due to the particularities of the case, it is indispensable to determine the relevance or not of opening the sanctioning procedure, or to gather indications that tend to clarify its necessity or not. In the case of relationships regulated by the Teaching Career Regime (Régimen de la Carrera Docente), Title II ESC, that regulatory framework establishes a procedure for handling complaints that could provide grounds for imposing the disciplinary regime. In this sense, article 65 of the ESC establishes that any complaint or report must be presented to the immediate supervisor of the agent involved, who, according to the seriousness of the alleged fault, shall reserve it for his/her own knowledge or shall refer it to the Personnel Department of the Ministry of Public Education, which, in the event that it "…finds merit, shall order the immediate investigation of charges…". These actions can also be initiated ex officio. In turn, according to article 66 ejusdem, if the alleged fault could imply a written warning, the immediate supervisor may propose to the Director of the Personnel Department to resolve definitively. When the immediate supervisor learns of a fault that is not within his/her competence, he/she must refer the matter to the direct knowledge of the Personnel Department. In line with the precepts of article 69 of that legal body, when the instruction of the case does not yield merit to continue with the proceedings, the Personnel Department, by a reasoned act, may order the archiving of the file; otherwise, it must formulate in writing the charges to be brought, giving transfer to the public agent for a period of 10 days, a period within which he/she must present his/her defense arguments. Once the evidence is discharged (articles 70-71 ESC), the Personnel Department shall pass the file to the Tribunal for the Teaching Career (Tribunal de la Carrera Docente) so that this body may decide what corresponds -art. 71-, for which purpose, having verified the absence of nullities in the case, it must issue its decision within a period of 8 extendable days. When the recommendation of the Tribunal for the Teaching Career is the dismissal of the official, in accordance with the precepts of mandate 75 of the ESC, once the referred procedures are satisfied, it corresponds to the Minister, within the period of one month (stipulated in article 74 ibidem), to file the respective action before the Civil Service Tribunal (Tribunal de Servicio Civil). The detail of that course of action makes evident that the statute of limitations for initiating disciplinary actions is computed from the moment the holder of that power is in an objective possibility (or duty) of its exercise. In the specific case, and given that the exact date on which the communication contained in official letter no. ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016 was received has not been proven, it is the Tribunal's criterion that the moment from which the aforementioned prescriptive period began to run occurred on February 25, 2016, the date on which the Human Resources Directorate issued the resolution initiating the administrative disciplinary procedure, a circumstance in which this Tribunal agrees that the Administration was objectively in a reasonable position to exercise the disciplinary power. In accordance with the rules for counting time periods established in the Civil Procedure Code, applicable supplementarily, be they article 146 of Law No. 7130 or article 30.5 of Law No. 9342: "…Time periods in years or months shall be counted according to the calendar, i.e., from date to date…", in such a way that the one-month period expired on March 25, 2016, without any interruption of the same having occurred by that moment through the practice of the notification of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos), which did not occur until March 29, that is, four days after the statute of limitations for the exercise of the disciplinary power had occurred. For this reason, the subsequent act by which the Minister of Public Education ordered the termination of the plaintiff, occurred when that hierarchical instance no longer had the jurisdiction to do so, due to the expiry of the period to exercise said power. In relation to the thesis sustained by the State as part of its defense of lack of right, the same is inadmissible in the judgment of this Tribunal, because the plaintiff did plead the statute of limitations of the disciplinary power during the course of the administrative procedure, specifically during the appeal phase, in connection with the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) (proven fact number 9) and therefore, without a final administrative decision yet being in place; although it is worth saying –as already noted– that in this matter, its opposition in the procedure is not essential as a requirement to decree the statute of limitations. In this way and as previously indicated, the disciplinary or corrective power must therefore be declared time-barred (prescrita), the exercise of which concluded with the issuance of the act by which Mr. Nombre12949 was terminated from his interim appointment, decreed by administrative resolution of the Minister of Public Education number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5, 2016, subsequently confirmed by the rejection of the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed by Mr. Nombre12949 , by means of resolution no. 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6 of that same year, and consequently, what is proper in Law is to declare the nullity of both acts, as the Administration lacked the jurisdiction to issue that sanctioning act. By reason of the nullity declared, a ruling is therefore omitted regarding the substantive allegations promoted by the plaintiff, as they lack any utility for this judgment.- VII.- ON REINSTATEMENT AND OTHER ASPECTS OF THE CLAIM.- As has been proven (proven fact number 01), Mr. Nombre12950 was appointed on an interim basis to position number 433464 located at the Ministry of Public Education, for the period between February 1, 2016, and January 31, 2017. As things stand, the possibility of reinstatement in that type of position and the recognition of labor emoluments in relation to those future appointments is not appropriate, precisely due to the provisional nature of the interim designation. On this point, the reasons developed by the Administrative Litigation Court of Cassation in vote number 82-F-TC-2013 of 2:00 p.m. on August 22, 2013, can be observed, in which it heard the claim of an interim servant of the Judicial Branch, regarding whom the nullity of the termination of appointment act was ordered, just as in the present case. On that occasion, that High Court established: "…it is important to clarify that the consequence of the illegality of a dismissal is the reinstatement (restitución) of the official to the position he/she held; however, this rule must be applied exclusively to those servants who held permanent positions (puestos en propiedad) and not on an interim basis. The appellant is correct in this regard, even when he indicates that the Tribunal improperly assessed official letter no. 0251-DRL-11 from the Limón Regional Directorate, regarding the fact that the appointment of Mrs. Nombre12951 was until June 30, 2010. In this respect, it is clear that the interim official enjoys stability but of a relative nature, which translates into not having a subjective right to have the appointment extended indefinitely, and therefore, would not have the right to reinstatement at least during the time he/she was not appointed. The fact that her position was renewed from 2008 does not give her the right to be considered as an indefinite-term servant, since her position was interim. Neither is there a valid expectation that she would be appointed again, since it was equally foreseeable that upon the termination of her designation, the Institution would decide (by virtue of the problems she was accused of) not to renew her appointment.

In fact, the points that this Chamber questions gravitate here; first, the OIJ should have taken care to appoint the titular of the position held by agent Nombre12951., especially since she was being challenged; or failing that, wait for her appointment to expire and dispense with her services (by means of a duly reasoned determination) <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">since the interim appointee had no right whatsoever to be appointed on an indefinite basis, it was enough for the time to expire to terminate the employment relationship</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic">. In any event, acting otherwise gave neither the OIJ the right to summarily revoke the plaintiff’s appointment (while in full force and effect); nor Mrs. Nombre12951., the possibility of being reinstated in the post. Consequently, she would also not have the option of receiving wages from the cessation of duties until an effective reinstatement, since this latter possibility is impermissible because her appointment was until a fixed date. </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">What she is entitled to is compensation for the wages not received, from the dismissal</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic"> (13 May 2010 according to official communication 511-DG-10) </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">until the end of her appointment</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic"> (30 June 2010), under the terms and conditions set forth in the judgment, that is, deducting the applicable legal charges and indexing those sums…”</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> (Emphasis not in the original) Consequently, reinstatement as it has been sought is impermissible, since the legal situations that came into legal existence with the act of designation were subject to a term and therefore, upon its expiration, they expired, such that it is not possible to grant what has been requested. Finally, regarding the indemnifiable items, first, it must be clarified that pursuant to the provisions of transitory provision I of Ley N° 9343 (“Reforma Procesal Laboral”), as well as numeral 98.2 CPCA, since the preliminary hearing in this matter was held on 23 May 2017, that is, prior to the entry into force of that Ley, this pronouncement shall be made in accordance with the rules prior to said reform, for since this matter is one of pure Law, this Chamber deems that said hearing fulfills the role of the evidentiary hearing referred to in the transitory provision. Thus, what is appropriate in Law pursuant to articles 190 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, 44 of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil and 82 of the Código de Trabajo, and in the absence of precision in their arguments, claims, and the corresponding demonstration by the representation of the plaintiff –despite constituting their procedural burden–, both in the complaint and during the preliminary hearing, the State is ordered to pay compensation ("</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic">by way of damages</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">") equivalent to the wages not received from 13 May 2016 until 31 January 2017, this concept comprising the periodic emoluments (for example, base salary, bonuses, or other economic items) that would have corresponded to them during said period and according to the salary scale fixed by the legal system for the performance of the duties they were responsible for in position No. 433464 from which they were improperly dismissed. From said sums there shall be deducted, if applicable, that relative to the income tax on dependent personal activity (wage tax), which must be reported to the Ministerio de Hacienda, as well as that pertaining to the contribution regime of the Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, the retirement and pension system, and other wage deductions. As this is a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of wages not received, the indexation mechanism provided in numeral 123 CPCA shall apply, from the time those sums were exigible according to the wage payment schedule of the Administración Central for those dates, until their effective payment, so that Mr. Nombre12949<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">may receive an updated payment, as well as to ensure that the respective deductions are made at present value. Given that the management of the information corresponding to these items is the responsibility of the defendant Administración and given that it did not provide the same to the case file (dynamic burden of proof – Art. 41.1 CPC Ley N° 9342), the order to pay these items must be issued exceptionally in abstract terms, as authorized by article 122.m.ii) CPCA, so that only its quantification is reserved for the judgment execution phase. The parties are to take note that this pronouncement is without prejudice to the possibility that said items may be liquidated in the administrative channel, by alternative dispute resolution, or in the jurisdictional venue (execution), with the Administración being obligated to their payment regardless of whether or not there is a liquidation resolution from the judges of the judgment execution phase. No other economic item that could have arisen from the public employment relationship is granted, given that the representation of Nombre12950 neither alleged, nor established a specific claim, nor provided suitable evidence that would have fehaciently proven the existence of any right they would have been entitled to receive, all this pursuant to articles 58.1.e), 82 and 119 CPCA, 41.1.1, 41.5 and 62.1 CPC (Ley N° 9342), 82 of the Código de Trabajo, 44 of the Estatuto del Servicio Civil, and 190 and 196 LGAP.- </span></p><p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">VIII.-</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt"> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">REGARDING THE CLAIMS AND THE EXCEPTIONS FILED.- </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">In accordance with the reasoning set forth above, claims number one and two are granted and, consequently, the absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) is declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 of 14:00 hours on 05 May and number 2444-2016 of 08:00 hours on 06 July, both in the year 2016 and issued by the Office of the Ministro de Educación Pública, by which Mr. Nombre12949<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">was dismissed from his interim appointment (nombramiento interino) in position number 433464, precisely, because the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power had run. The petitions contained in claims number three and four are partially granted, specifically, regarding the order to pay compensation consisting of the wages not received and their monetary updating (indexation), corresponding to the remaining period of the interim appointment and which he could not receive as a result of the administrative conduct whose invalidity and subsequent absolute nullity are declared here. The action is dismissed regarding the reinstatement sought, as the term of the plaintiff's appointment has expired, and regarding any other items by way of "damages", given the interested party's failure to fulfill their respective procedural burden, specifically their due and precise allegation and proof, it being impermissible for this Tribunal to substitute its labor, in particular based on articles 119 CPCA and 61.2 CPC (Ley N° 9342). Consequently, the exception of </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">lack of Right</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> raised by the State's representation is partially applicable, only regarding the items of the complaint that have been denied, and rejected in all other respects; such that what is proper in Law is to partially grant the action as is indeed ordered.- </span></p><p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">IX.-</span><span> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">ON COSTS AND THEIR INTERESTS.-</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> Pursuant to articles 193 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo and 73 of the Código Procesal Civil (Ley N° 9342), the order to pay costs constitutes an obligation imposed on the losing party by virtue of being so, for the benefit of the prevailing party, in order to reimburse the latter for the various categories of expenses listed therein. Both numerals provide for various grounds to dispense from this order, so in the absence of arguments or evidence that allow this Tribunal, in the specific case, to weigh and consider any of these grounds as proven, it is not possible then to except the losing party totally or partially from the application of said maxim, so pursuant to the cited norms, what is due is to impose the order on the losing party. In supplementary application of the provisions of articles 61.2, 62.1 and 76.1 of the Código Procesal Civil (Ley N° 9342), since in this matter the amount of the order is made in abstract and therefore, pending liquidation in the judgment execution phase, the determination of the amount of costs shall be carried out in that phase, taking as a basis the total of the order, as well as the liquidation and the corresponding evidence that must be provided to the case file by the prevailing party. Regarding the sought-after interests on costs, in light of the fact that this ancillary obligation is only applicable once a principal liquid and exigible monetary obligation is unsatisfied (articles 706, 773 and 1163 Código Civil) and in order to ensure that its recognition is guaranteed by way of the intangibility of res judicata, despite the fact that in the specific case there is not yet a monetary debt that meets said characteristics, what is appropriate is its granting likewise in abstract, subject to the eventual liquidation that the victorious party must present at the appropriate procedural moment when those circumstances concur.-</span></p><p style="margin-top:5.1pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">POR TANTO:</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">THE EXCEPTION OF LACK OF RIGHT IS PARTIALLY GRANTED</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> raised by the representation of the </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">STATE</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">.- Consequently, </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">THE COMPLAINT IS DECLARED PARTIALLY WITH MERIT </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">filed by </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Nombre12949</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0;</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">against </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">THE STATE</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">. The absolute nullity (nulidad absoluta) is therefore declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 of 14:00 hours on 05 May and number 2444-2016 of 08:00 hours on 06 July, both in the year 2016 and issued by the Office of the Ministro de Educación Pública, because the statute of limitations (prescripción) for the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power had run. The State is ordered in abstract to pay compensation in favor of the plaintiff, equivalent to the wages not received from 13 May 2016 until 31 January 2017, this concept comprising the periodic emoluments (for example, base salary, bonuses, or other economic items) that would have corresponded to them during said period and according to the salary scale fixed by the legal system for the performance of the duties they were responsible for in position No. 433464. From said sums there shall be deducted, if applicable, that relative to the income tax on dependent personal activity (wage tax), which must be reported to the Ministerio de Hacienda, as well as that pertaining to the contribution regime of the Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, the retirement and pension system, and other wage deductions. As this is a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of wages not received, the indexation mechanism provided in numeral 123 CPCA shall apply, from the time those sums were exigible according to the wage payment schedule of the Administración Central for those dates.</span></p> The exclusive quantification of these items is therefore reserved for the judgment enforcement stage.- The losing party is ordered to pay all costs and their interest in the terms set forth in Considerando IX of this judgment.- The remaining claims are denied as being legally unfounded.-</span><span> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Notifíquese.-</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Daniel Aguilar Méndez</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Roberto Garita Navarro</span><span style="width:13.62pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Silvia Fernández Brenes</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">&#xa0;</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">&#xa0;</span></p><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse"><tr><td style="width:469pt; padding-right:3.25pt; padding-left:3.25pt; vertical-align:top"><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold">Documento firmado por:</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">DANIEL AGUILAR MENDEZ, JUEZ/A DECISOR/A</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">ROBERTO GARITA NAVARRO, JUEZ/A DECISOR/A</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">SILVIA FERNÁNDEZ BRENES, JUEZ/A DECISOR/A</span></p></td></tr></table><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span>&#xa0;</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri">1</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">&#xa0;</span></p></div></body></html> In accordance with the provisions of numeral 69 of that legal body, when the instruction of the case does not yield merit to continue with the proceedings, the Personnel Department (Departamento de Personal), by reasoned act, may order the archiving of the case file; otherwise, it must formulate in writing the charges to be notified, giving the public official a period of 10 days to respond, a period within which they must present their defense arguments. Once the evidence has been taken (articles 70-71 ESC), the Personnel Department shall forward the case file to the Teaching Career Tribunal (Tribunal de la Carrera Docente) so that this body may decide what is appropriate -art. 71-, for which purpose, having verified the absence of nullities in the case, it must issue its decision within a period of 8 extendable days. When the recommendation of the Teaching Career Tribunal is the dismissal of the official, in accordance with the provisions of mandate 75 of the ESC, once the referred procedures have been completed, it is the responsibility of the Minister, within a period of one month (provided by article 74 ibidem), to present the respective petition before the Civil Service Tribunal (Tribunal de Servicio Civil). The details of that course make it evident that the statute of limitations for initiating disciplinary actions is calculated from the moment when the holder of that power is in an objective position (or duty) to exercise it.

17 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of official Nombre12949); 5) By means of a resolution dated February 29, 2016, the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education issued a statement of charges (traslado de cargos) to official Nombre12949, in which it formally notified him of his absences from work and attributed them to him as serious misconduct that could lead to a sanction that *“…could range from a suspension without pay of up to 30 days, to the termination of the temporary appointment (interinidad) without employer liability…”*. Likewise, in said act, he was summoned to exercise his right to a defense within a period of ten business days in accordance with Article 69 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto del Servicio Civil) (f. 18 and 19 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of official Nombre12949); 6) Through emails sent by official Lisbeth Acosta Campos, in her capacity as investigator (instructora) of the disciplinary procedure, at 11:13 a.m. on Dirección1591 and 11:41 a.m. on Monday, March 28, both dates in 2016 (f.

24 and 22 of the certified digital copy of administrative file No. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949), addressed to officials Henry Otárola Zamora and Luis Ángel Jiménez, directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas, informed them that they had to proceed with the notification of the transfer of charges of the official Nombre12949, as can be seen in the following digital extracts of the documents described herein:--------------------- El Voto 4654-2003 de la Sala Constitucional es claro, al integrar forest cover (cobertura boscosa), la variable ambiental y el subject of protection (objeto de protección), que es el bosque, indicando que la forest cover (cobertura boscosa) es un elemento esencial para mantener y mejorar la calidad de vida de los habitantes. En consecuencia, el Estado debe velar por la conservación, protección y restauración de los bosques, como recurso natural y como ecosistema, evitando los cambios perjudiciales.

En relación con las áreas de protección establecidas en la Ley Forestal, la misma Sala Constitucional ha indicado en el Voto 4654-2003 que el bosque constituye un ecosistema de fundamental importancia para el mantenimiento del equilibrio ecológico, la conservación de la biodiversidad y la protección de los suelos y de las fuentes y cursos de agua. Por lo tanto, la protección de las áreas de protección establecidas en la Ley Forestal y en el Reglamento a la Ley Forestal es de orden público e interés social.

Ahora bien, el Artículo 33 de la Ley Forestal establece que las áreas de protección son:

Además, el Reglamento a la Ley Forestal (Decreto Ejecutivo 25721-MINAE), en su Artículo 34, establece que para la aplicación del Artículo 33 de la Ley Forestal, se tomará en cuenta lo dispuesto en los anexos de este reglamento. El Anexo 1 establece la metodología para determinar el ancho de las áreas de protección, y el Anexo 2 establece los criterios técnicos para su delimitación.

Por su parte, los Artículos 18 y 19 del Reglamento de Fraccionamiento y Urbanización (Decreto N° 31849-MINAE) establecen las normas para respetar las áreas de protección en los procesos de subdivision (fraccionamiento) y desarrollo urbano, indicando que estas áreas deben ser cedidas a la municipalidad o a una entidad pública, o bien, constituidas como easements (servidumbres) en favor del Estado, garantizando su lifetime tenure (irreductibilidad).

Finalmente, es importante señalar que el Pago de Servicios Ambientales (PSA) y el PSAH, creados por la Ley Forestal, constituyen herramientas para compensar a los propietarios de terrenos que mantienen la forest cover (cobertura boscosa) en áreas de protección, reconociendo el servicio ambiental que prestan estos ecosistemas. La conservación de estas áreas es fundamental para la conectividad biológica, la recarga de acuíferos y la mitigación de riesgos naturales, aspectos que deben ser considerados en la planificación del uso del suelo y en la evaluación de los proyectos de desarrollo.

<img src=" Considerando III. MINAE, through the Regional Subcouncil of the Osa Conservation Area (Area de Conservación Osa, ACOSA), Setena Resolution 245-2005-SETENA, dated March 23, two thousand five, establishing the Environmental Viability for the execution of the project, and in the technical analysis it indicates something that has already been alluded to by this Office, which is, that several places where the area intended for Protection in this Plan is located, coincide with land administered by the IDA—now INDER—and this brings about the existence of legal obstacles for the feasibility of providing the lands intended for protection in said Plan as a Protected Area (área de protección) of the agricultural lots by virtue of a decree.

Por tanto,

Translating the technical analysis of the "Protocol of Environmental Quality Criteria for the Ex-Parrita" (Protocolo de los Criterios de Calidad Ambiental para el Ex-Parrita), a Framework Technical Document of Article 73 of the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal). This Protocol was drawn up based on the Guideline with instructions and technical specifications for the formulation of the official document approved in CNE-MINAE-S-MP-AC-OC-001. In said Protocol, a series of parameters of environmental quality criteria for the Ex-Parrita properties are indicated, among them, the protection of areas with forest cover (cobertura boscosa) under the concept of irreductibility (irreductibilidad) of forest areas, the protection of water bodies, the protection of riparian areas, the identification of slopes with high vulnerability, the percentage of soil impermeability, and the protection of the maritime-terrestrial zone among others. According to the aforementioned technical document, a Registry of forest cover was established where they indicate that areas with forest cover corresponding to primary forest or secondary forest in an advanced stage of succession must be included as Protected Areas (áreas de protección) with lifetime tenure (irreductibilidad) within the zoning of the property.

It is precisely from this registry of forest cover that twenty-five point eighteen hectares (25.18 ha) of forest cover were inventoried within the property covered by the present plan, which, in strict application of Article 19 paragraph b), and Anexo 2, numeral 2 of the Subdivision Regulation (Reglamento de Fraccionamiento) as well as what is established in the Protocol of Environmental Quality Criteria for the Ex-Parrita prepared by SETENA with the participation of the UCR, MOPT, MINAE-SINAC-ACOSA, INVU, ICE, CNE, IMN, IGN, JASEC, CONARE, among others, must be translated into protected areas of the plan and/or agricultural lots and provided in favor of MINAE-SINAC-ACOSA to ensure their effective protection, this by virtue of a duly registered separation easement (servidumbre).

This office observes as relevant, the pronouncement made by the Attorney General's Office (Procuraduría General de la República) in Opinion C-178-2006, on the protection of primary and secondary forests in advanced succession stage existing within and outside patrimonial natural domains of the State, by stating: "[…] the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic, through Opinion C-178 of August 9, 2006, concluded that primary and secondary forests in an advanced stage of succession existing within and outside patrimonial natural domains of the State are subject to the special protection regime, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 13, 18 and 19 of the Forestry Law [...] the State has the power and the duty to safeguard the natural forest heritage whatever the owner of the fund where it is located, ordering the appropriate protection measures, which includes the registration of the corresponding easements (servidumbres) and the allocation of State resources through the mechanisms of Payment for Environmental Services (Pago de Servicios Ambientales, PSA) and Payment for Environmental Services for Forest Protection (Pago de Servicios Ambientales por Protección de Bosque, PSAH) [...] The protection of the forest is a matter of public interest and the powers that the legal system confers on the Forest Administration are sufficient to carry it out, regardless of who owns the fund where it is located [...]".

On this matter, the Constitutional Chamber in Voto 4654-2003, of nine thirty hours on May twenty-eighth, two thousand three, expressed:

"The binding nature of the criteria issued by SETENA implies that the municipalities have the obligation to respect them in the formulation and application of regulatory plans, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Organic Law of the Environment." The binding criteria issued by SETENA are mainly based on what is stipulated in the technical document called "Protocol of Environmental Quality Criteria for the Ex-Parrita", which alludes to the way to manage the forest cover in plan projects and/or subdivisions (fraccionamientos) in the Ex-Parrita, indicating that the areas with forest cover provided and registered as Protected Areas (áreas de protección) to MINAE-SINAC-ACOSA ensure their effective protection through a registered separation easement (servidumbre).

• 7)At 7:10 am and 5 pm on March 29, 2016, notice was served at the San Isidro and Linda Vista educational centers, respectively, to the official Nombre12949, of the transfer of charges within the disciplinary administrative procedure followed against him (see notification records at folios 30 and 33 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 8) On April 15, 2016, a written submission was received in the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education from the official here Nombre12950, in which he proceeded to answer the charges in question (undisputed fact and f.

34 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 9) By administrative resolution number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5, 2016, the Minister of Public Education resolved: “…To terminate the interim appointment of the servant Nombre12949, whose particulars are known in the record, without liability to the State, because it was proven that he incurred serious misconduct (faltas graves) in the exercise of his duties…”. This act was notified to Mr. Nombre12949 on May 23, 2016 (f. 39 to 35 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 10) On May 25, 2016, the Department of Disciplinary Affairs of the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education received a motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed by Mr. Nombre12950 against resolution no. 1532-2016 (undisputed fact and f. 46 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); 11) By administrative resolution no. 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6, 2016, the Acting Minister of Public Education resolved the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed in the following terms: “….I. To declare without merit the statute of limitations exception (excepción de prescripción) raised in the appeal brief dated May 25, 2016, by the servant Nombre12949 […] II. To declare without merit the Appeal for Review (Recurso de Revisión) filed by the servant Nombre12949, against Resolution No. 1532-2016…”. This act was notified to Mr. Nombre12949 on July 26, 2016 (undisputed fact and f. 52 to 47 of the certified digital copy of administrative file no. 69-2016 in the name of the official Nombre12949 ); and 12) On May 13, 2016, Mr. Nombre12949 was terminated from position no. 433464 which he held on an interim basis (see personnel action no. 201605-MP-2079381 dated November 15, 2016, admitted as evidence for better resolution).- V.- FACTS NOT PROVEN.- The following facts are deemed not proven for the purposes of this judgment, either because the parties failed to meet their evidentiary burdens, or because the Office did not find suitable evidence that, in light of the rules of sound criticism (sana crítica), would allow them to be accredited:

1.- The extension for more than twenty years of the public employment relationship maintained between Mr. Nombre12949 and the State, through the Ministry of Public Education, in which the former served as a teacher on an interim basis; 2.- The exact date on which the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry of Public Education received official note number ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016, dated February 17, 2016, signed by the directors of the Linda Vista and San Isidro schools of the Regional Directorate of Puntarenas; and 3.- The existence and amount of economic items of the public employment relationship maintained between Mr. Nombre12949 and the State, other than the lost salaries and their monetary adjustment, to which he would have been entitled as a result of the unjustified termination of his interim appointment.- VI.- ON THE TEMPORAL ELEMENT IN THE EXERCISE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIVE POWERS OF A DISCIPLINARY NATURE.- In employment relationships, the exercise of the disciplinary or corrective power of the head of the agency against officials who have committed punishable offenses is subject to a time factor, after which such exercise may not be undertaken. This temporal limit, as will be seen, varies depending on the regulated matter and the existence of a special legal regime that configures particular rules for specific types of public employment relationships. Consequently, we can affirm that this disciplinary power (which is based on the doctrine of article 102 LGAP) is not unrestricted in time. Unlike other public powers that, due to their finalistic aspects, are considered imprescriptible—e.g., the protection of public domain assets (bienes demaniales)—those referring to internal sanctioning exercise—such as the one examined in this case—are subject to temporality rules by virtue of which they may expire due to the lapse of the time established by the legal system without being realized. Therefore, in this type of relationship, the holder of the disciplinary or corrective power is the administrative head and the passive subject is the public official, who, to that extent, is subject to internal corrective power only for the period expressly set by the applicable regulations, after which his power to demand recognition of the loss of hierarchical power emerges. This is a matter left to the discretion of the legislator, who determines in each case whether it is a statute of limitations (prescripción) or a lapse (caducidad) of the eventual exercise of those powers. From this standpoint, in the liberatory statute of limitations (prescripción liberatoria), the concurrence of three fundamental factors is required, namely: a) inertia of the holder of a right in its exercise, b) passage of time fixed by the legal system in that inertia of the holder and; c) the allegation or exception by the passive subject of the legal relationship asserting the statute of limitations (prescripción). However, in matters of public employment, the negative prescription can well be alleged as a cause of nullity of the final sanctioning act, even if that defense had not been exercised prior to the issuance of the public will. Thus, the disciplinary or corrective power cannot be considered one of an imprescriptible nature, trying to justify that deduction in the rule of article 66.1 of the LGAP, but rather it is one subject to preclusion rules due to temporal factors, as visualized in subsection 3) of that same article 66 LGAP. Likewise, regarding actions of the Public Administration in administrative sanctioning procedures, what is established by article 329.3 of the LGAP, which states: "3. The final act issued outside the time limit shall be valid for all legal purposes, unless otherwise provided by law," is fundamental. So that when a legal provision establishes the loss or preclusion of the competence, the act issued in exercise of that already-expired power could not be held valid. In that sense and within the general framework of the statute of limitations (prescripción) of the corrective and disciplinary power, this Section of the Contentious-Administrative Tribunal has been consistent in considering that there are various scenarios or rules of temporal exercise of these powers. This differentiation, which incidentally, takes as its basis the phase of the procedure in question, allows a more precise approach to the topic under discussion, since indeed the legal system grants different treatment according to those stages, as the temporal limit for the exercise of said power varies, in accordance with the characteristic notes of each of them. In that regard, and returning to the specific case, the representation of the plaintiff has come to restrict in its theory of the case, the allegation of the statute of limitations (prescripción) of the disciplinary power to an alleged paralysis of the procedure occurring at its beginning, from the date on which the disciplined facts occurred, or from the moment the competent body became aware of the misconduct (falta) and the notification of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos), that is, we are facing a possible situation of statute of limitations on the exercise of the disciplinary power (prescripción del ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria). This scenario refers to the time limit set by the legal system for the holder of the internal corrective power to adopt the procedural measures of the case, allowing them to issue the final decision. At this level, it concerns the maximum time limit established by the legal system for the administrative head to order the opening of the pertinent procedure, aimed at establishing the relevance or not of imposing a sanction. Thus, the notification of the opening of the procedure that seeks the establishment of the facts (material truth) that serve as the basis for the motive of the act, generates an interrupting effect on that margin of temporality, to the extent that it consists of an express act and a measure that directly tends toward the exercise of that power. It could not be considered that the aforementioned time limit for the exercise of the power is only interrupted by the issuance of the final act, since, as a derivation of the principle of due process (debido proceso), it is necessary that the Administration order the opening of an administrative case, to establish whether or not the sanction should be imposed, as a derivation of what is established in articles 214, 221, 297, and 308 LGAP. In this hypothesis, and in the consideration of this Chamber, the disciplinary power of the administrative head is subject to the prescriptive term, which is regulated in article 603 of the Labor Code (applicable by express referral of canon 51 of the Civil Service Statute –ESC-), a rule in force at the time of the facts and in accordance with what is established in Transitory Provision II of Law No. 9343 of January 25, 2016, the “Labor Procedural Reform” law. The article in question reads: “…The rights and actions of employers to justifiably dismiss workers or to discipline their misconduct (faltas) prescribe in one month, which shall begin to run from when cause for the separation arose or, as the case may be, from when the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction were known…” (Highlighting is not from the original). In this way, we can affirm that indeed the period for the statute of limitations (prescripción) of the disciplinary power to operate is one month, which is necessarily interrupted by the effective communication of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos) to the interested party. It is worth clarifying that the foregoing is without prejudice to misconduct (faltas) regulated by special rules, such as those expressed by the internal control regime, probity in the public function, and public finance management, in which, according to what is regulated by the General Law of Internal Control, No. 8292 (art. 43), the Law against Corruption and Illicit Enrichment in the Public Function, No. 8422 (art. 44) and article 71 of the Organic Law of the Comptroller General of the Republic, No. 7428, rules in which a special period operates, according to the scenarios and from the moments those rules establish. Now then, the starting point for the computation of that prescriptive term is determining. On this matter, article 603 of the Labor Code indicates that the period runs from when the cause for separation arose, or failing that, from when the facts that gave rise to the disciplinary correction were known. In this sense, the period is computed from the moment the holder of the corrective power is in an objective possibility of knowing the misconduct (falta) and therefore, undertaking the exercise of his power. Hence, when the particularities of the case require the completion of a prior preliminary investigation phase, the alluded term runs from the moment the results of that exercise are brought to the attention of the head. This is also the case for misconduct (faltas) evidenced in Internal Audit reports, but whose prosecution for sanctioning purposes must be submitted to the respective head. In such a scenario, the indicated period is computed from the moment of the reception or effective communication to the head of said report, since it is only at that moment that the holder can validly adopt decisions regarding the opening or not of disciplinary proceedings. However, the necessity or not of that phase (preliminary investigation) must be discriminated in each case, as otherwise it could be used as a strategy to evade the statute of limitations (prescripción), given that not in all scenarios would that investigation be necessary, but only in those where, due to the particularities of the case, it is indispensable to determine the relevance or not of opening the sanctioning procedure, or to collect evidence (indicios) tending to clarify its necessity or not. Regarding relationships regulated by the Teaching Career Regime (Régimen de la Carrera Docente), Title II ESC, that regulatory framework establishes a procedure for handling complaints that could provide grounds for the imposition of the disciplinary regime. In that sense, article 65 of the ESC establishes that any complaint or report must be filed before the immediate superior of the agent involved, who, according to the seriousness of the alleged misconduct (falta), will reserve it for his own knowledge or will forward it to the Personnel Department of the Ministry of Public Education, which, in the event that it “…finds merit, shall order the immediate investigation of charges…”. These actions can also be initiated ex officio. On the other hand, according to article 66 ejusdem, if the alleged misconduct (falta) could imply a written warning, the immediate superior may propose to the Director of the Personnel Department to resolve definitively. When the immediate superior is informed of a misconduct (falta) that is not within his competence, he must forward the matter to the direct knowledge of the Personnel Department. In line with the provisions of article 69 of that legal body, when the instruction of the case reveals no merit to continue with the proceedings, the Personnel Department, by a reasoned act, may order the archiving of the file; otherwise, it must formulate the charges to be intimated in writing, giving a hearing (traslado) to the public agent for a period of 10 days, a period within which he must present his arguments in his defense. Once the evidence has been taken (articles 70-71 ESC), the Personnel Department will forward the file to the Tribunal de la Carrera Docente so that this body may decide as appropriate -art. 71-, for which purpose, having verified the absence of nullities in the case, it must issue its decision within a period of 8 days, extendable. When the recommendation of the Tribunal de la Carrera Docente is the dismissal of the official, in line with the provisions of mandate 75 of the ESC, having satisfied the aforementioned procedures, it is incumbent upon the Minister, within the period of one month (provided for in article 74 ibidem), to file the respective action before the Tribunal de Servicio Civil. The detail of that course of action makes evident that the statute of limitations (prescripción) for initiating disciplinary actions is computed from the moment when the holder of that power is in an objective possibility (or duty) of its exercise. In the specific case, and given that the exact date on which the communication contained in official note no. ESC San Isidro-012-2016 and ESC L.V. 006-2016 was received has not been taken as proven, it is the criterion of the Tribunal that the moment from which the aforementioned prescriptive period began to run occurred on February 25, 2016, the date on which the Human Resources Directorate issued the resolution initiating the disciplinary administrative procedure, a circumstance in which this Tribunal coincides that the Administration was objectively in a reasonable possibility to exercise the disciplinary power. In accordance with the rules for counting time limits set forth in the Civil Procedure Code, applicable supplementarily, be they articles 146 of Law No. 7130 or 30.5 of Law No. 9342: “…Time limits by years or months shall be counted according to the calendar, that is, from date to date…”, such that the period of the month expired on March 25, 2016, without the interruption thereof having occurred by that moment through the practice of the notification of the statement of charges (traslado de cargos), which occurred only on March 29, that is, four days after the prescription for the exercise of the disciplinary power had occurred. For this reason, the subsequent act by which the Minister of Public Education ordered the termination of the plaintiff, was issued when that hierarchical instance no longer had the competence to do so, due to the expiration of the period to exercise said power. In relation to the thesis held by the State as part of its defense of lack of Right, it is inappropriate in the opinion of this Tribunal, inasmuch as the plaintiff did allege the statute of limitations (prescripción) of the disciplinary power during the course of the administrative procedure, specifically during the appeal phase, on the occasion of the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) (proven fact number 9) and therefore, without a firm administrative decision yet being available; although it is worth saying –as already noted– that in this matter, its opposition in the procedure is not essential as a requirement to decree the statute of limitations (prescripción). In this manner, and as indicated above, the disciplinary or corrective power whose exercise concluded with the issuance of the act by which Mr. Nombre12949 was terminated from his interim appointment, ordered through the administrative resolution of the Minister of Public Education number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5, 2016, later confirmed by the rejection of the motion for reconsideration (recurso de reposición) filed by Mr. Nombre12949 , through resolution no. 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6 of that same year, must therefore be declared to have prescribed and consequently, what is appropriate in Law is to declare the nullity of both acts, as the Administration lacked the competence to issue that sanctioning act. By reason of the nullity declared, any pronouncement regarding the substantive allegations promoted by the plaintiff is omitted, as it lacks any utility for this judgment.- VII.- ON REINSTATEMENT AND OTHER CLAIMS OF THE LAWSUIT.- As has been established (proven fact number 01), Mr. Nombre12950 was appointed on an interim basis to position number 433464 located in the Ministry of Public Education, for the period between February 1, 2016, and January 31, 2017. That being the case, the possibility of reinstatement in that type of position and the recognition of labor emoluments in relation to those future appointments is not appropriate, precisely in light of the provisional nature of the interim designation. On this point, one may observe the reasons developed by the Tribunal de Casación de lo Contencioso Administrativo in vote number 82-F-TC-2013 of 2:00 p.m. on August 22, 2013, in which it heard the claim of an interim servant of the Judicial Branch, regarding whom the annulment of the termination act of the appointment was ordered, similar to the present case. On that occasion, that High Court established: “…it is important to make clear that the consequence of the illegality of a dismissal is the reinstatement (restitución) of the official to the position he occupied, however, this rule must be applied exclusively to those servants who had been occupying permanent/proprietary positions (puestos en propiedad) and not on an interim basis. The appellant is correct in this aspect, even when indicating that the Tribunal improperly assessed official letter no. 0251-DRL-11 from the Regional Directorate of Limón, regarding the fact that Mrs. Nombre12951’s appointment was only until June 30, 2010. In this regard, it is clear that the interim official enjoys stability, but of a relative nature, which translates into the fact that he does not have a subjective right to have his appointment extended indefinitely, and therefore would not have the right to reinstatement at least during the time he was not appointed. The fact that his position was extended since 2008 does not give him the right to be considered a servant of indefinite duration, since his position was interim. Neither does a valid expectation exist that he would be appointed again, since it was equally foreseeable that, upon the conclusion of his designation, the Organization would decide (by virtue of the problems alleged against him), not to renew his appointment.

In fact, the points that this Chamber questions gravitate here; first, the OIJ should have taken care to appoint the titular holder of the position that Agent Nombre12951 occupied, especially since she was being questioned; or failing that, wait for her appointment to expire and dispense with her services (by means of a duly reasoned determination) <span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">since the interim employee had no right whatsoever to be appointed indefinitely, it was sufficient for the time to expire to terminate the employment relationship</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic">. In any case, acting otherwise gave neither the OIJ the right to untimely revoke the plaintiff's appointment (while in full force); nor to Mrs. Nombre12951, the possibility of being reinstated to the post. Consequently, she would also not have the option of receiving salaries from the cessation of duties until an effective reinstatement, since this last possibility is improper because her appointment was until a specific date. </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">What does correspond to her is compensation for the salaries not received, from the dismissal</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic"> (May 13, 2010, according to official letter 511-DG-10) </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline">until the end of her appointment</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic"> (June 30, 2010), under the terms and conditions established in the judgment, that is, deducting the corresponding legal charges and indexing those sums…”</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> (Highlighting not from the original) Consequently, reinstatement is improper as it has been sought, since the legal situations that came into legal life with the designation act were subject to a term and therefore, upon the expiration thereof they perished, so that it is not possible to grant what has been requested. Finally, in relation to the compensatory claims, first, it must be clarified that pursuant to the provisions of Transitory Provision I of Law No. 9343 (“Reforma Procesal Laboral”), as well as numeral 98.2 CPCA, since the preliminary hearing in this matter was held on May 23, 2017, that is, prior to the entry into force of that Law, this pronouncement will be made in accordance with the rules prior to said reform, because this matter being one of pure law, this Chamber considers that said hearing fulfills the role of the evidentiary hearing referred to in the transitory provision. Thus, what is proper in law pursuant to articles 190 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, 44 of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil, and 82 of the Código de Trabajo, and in the absence of precision in the pleadings, claims, and the respective demonstration by the plaintiff's representation —despite this being their procedural burden—, both in the complaint and during the preliminary hearing, the State is condemned to the payment of compensation (“</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-style:italic">a título de daños y perjuicios</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">”) equivalent to the salaries not received from May 13, 2016, until January 31, 2017, this concept comprising the periodic stipends (for example, base salary, bonuses, or other economic items) that would have corresponded to him during said period and according to the salary scale set by the legal system for the performance of the duties he had in his charge in post No. 433464 from which he was improperly dismissed. From said sums must be deducted, if applicable, the income tax on dependent personal activity (salary tax), which must be reported to the Ministerio de Hacienda, as well as that pertaining to the contribution regime of the Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, the retirement and pension system, and other salary deductions. Being a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of salaries not received, the indexing mechanism provided in numeral 123 CPCA must be applied, from the moment those sums were due according to the Central Administration salary payment calendar for those dates, until their effective payment, so that Mr. Nombre12949</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">can receive an updated payment, and in order to ensure that the respective deductions are made at present value. Given that the management of the information corresponding to these items is the responsibility of the defendant Administration and given that it did not provide the same to the case file (dynamic burden of proof – Art. 41.1 CPC, Law No. 9342), the condemnation to the payment of these items must be carried out exceptionally in abstract terms, as authorized by article 122.m.ii) CPCA, so that only its quantification is reserved for the judgment execution stage. Let the parties take note that this pronouncement is without prejudice to the possibility that said items may be settled administratively, through alternative dispute resolution, or in court (execution), with the Administration being obliged to pay them regardless of the existence or not of a liquidation order from the judges of the judgment execution stage. No other economic item that could have derived from the public employment relationship is granted, since the representation of Nombre12950 neither alleged nor established a concrete petition, nor provided suitable evidence that could reliably prove the existence of any right that would have merited receiving payment, all of this in accordance with articles 58.1.e), 82 and 119 CPCA, 41.1.1, 41.5 and 62.1 CPC (Law No. 9342), 82 of the Código de Trabajo, 44 of the Estatuto del Servicio Civil, and 190 and 196 LGAP.- </span></p><p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">VIII.-</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt">&#xa0;</span><span style="line-height:150%; font-size:7pt"> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">REGARDING THE CLAIMS AND THE OPPOSED DEFENSES.- </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">In accordance with the reasoning set forth above, claims number one and two are granted and consequently, the absolute nullity is declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5 and number 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6, both of 2016 and issued by the Office of the Minister of Educación Pública, through which Mr. Nombre12949</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">was dismissed from his interim appointment in post number 433464, precisely, because the statute of limitations for the exercise of disciplinary or corrective power had elapsed. The petitions contained in claims number three and four are partially granted, specifically, regarding the condemnation to the payment of compensation consisting of the salaries not received and their monetary adjustment (indexing), corresponding to the remaining period of the interim appointment that he could not receive as a result of the administrative conduct whose invalidity and subsequent absolute nullity are declared herein. The action is dismissed regarding the reinstatement sought, as the term of the plaintiff's appointment has expired, and regarding any other items for “daños y perjuicios,” given the failure of the interested party to fulfill its respective procedural burden, specifically its due and precise allegation and proof, it being improper for this Court to substitute its labor, particularly based on articles 119 CPCA and 61.2 CPC (Law No. 9342). Consequently, the defense of </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">falta de Derecho</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> raised by the State's representation is partially proper, solely regarding the claims of the complaint that have been denied, and is rejected in all other respects; such that what is adjusted in law is to partially grant the action as is hereby ordered.- </span></p><p style="margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">IX.-</span><span> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">REGARDING COSTS AND THEIR INTERESTS.-</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> In accordance with articles 193 of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo and 73 of the Código Procesal Civil (Law No. 9342), the condemnation to the payment of costs constitutes an obligation imposed on the losing party by the very fact of being so, for the benefit of the prevailing party, in order to reimburse the latter for the various categories of expenses listed therein. Both numerals provide for various grounds for exemption from this condemnation, so that in the absence of pleadings or evidence that allow this Court, in the specific case, to weigh and consider any of these grounds accredited, it is not possible then to totally or partially exempt the losing party from the application of said rule, so that in accordance with the cited rules, what is due is to impose the condemnation on the losing party. In supplementary application of the provisions of articles 61.2, 62.1 and 76.1 of the Código Procesal Civil (Law No. 9342), since in this matter the amount of the condemnation is made in the abstract and therefore, pending liquidation in the judgment execution phase, it will be in that stage that the determination of the amount of costs must be carried out, taking as a basis for this the total of the condemnation, as well as the liquidation and the corresponding evidence that must be submitted to the case file by the prevailing party. Regarding the sought-after interest on costs, in view of the fact that this ancillary obligation is only proper once a principal liquid and due monetary obligation has been unsatisfied (articles 706, 773 and 1163 of the Código Civil) and in order to guarantee that its recognition is ensured through the intangibility of res judicata, even though in the specific case there is not yet a monetary debt that meets those characteristics, what is proper is its granting likewise in the abstract, subject to the eventual liquidation that the prevailing party must present at the appropriate procedural moment when those circumstances concur.-</span></p><p style="margin-top:5.1pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">POR TANTO:</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">THE DEFENSE OF FALTA DE DERECHO IS PARTIALLY GRANTED</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> raised by the representation of the </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">ESTADO</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">.- Consequently, </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">THE COMPLAINT FILED BY </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Nombre12949</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0; </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; -aw-import:spaces">&#xa0;</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'">against </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">EL ESTADO</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> IS PARTIALLY DECLARED WITH MERIT. The absolute nullity is therefore declared of the administrative acts consisting of administrative resolutions number 1532-2016 of 2:00 p.m. on May 5 and number 2444-2016 of 8:00 a.m. on July 6, both of 2016 and issued by the Office of the Minister of Educación Pública, because the statute of limitations for the exercise of disciplinary or corrective power had elapsed. The State is condemned in the abstract to the payment of compensation in favor of the plaintiff, equivalent to the salaries not received from May 13, 2016, until January 31, 2017, this concept comprising the periodic stipends (for example, base salary, bonuses, or other economic items) that would have corresponded to him during said period and according to the salary scale set by the legal system for the performance of the duties he had in his charge in post No. 433464. From said sums must be deducted, if applicable, the income tax on dependent personal activity (salary tax), which must be reported to the Ministerio de Hacienda, as well as that pertaining to the contribution regime of the Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, the retirement and pension system, and other salary deductions. Being a monetary obligation and as part of the quantification of the gross sums of salaries not received, the indexing mechanism provided in numeral 123 CPCA must be applied, from the moment those sums were due according to the Central Administration salary payment calendar for those dates. The exclusive quantification of these items is therefore reserved for the judgment execution stage.- The losing party is condemned to the total payment of costs and their interests as set forth in Considerando IX of this judgment.- The remaining claims are denied as being legally improper.-</span><span> </span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Notifíquese.-</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Daniel Aguilar Méndez</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Roberto Garita Navarro</span><span style="width:13.62pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="width:36pt; font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold; display:inline-block">&#xa0;</span><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">Silvia Fernández Brenes</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">&#xa0;</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS'; font-weight:bold">&#xa0;</span></p><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse"><tr><td style="width:469pt; padding-right:3.25pt; padding-left:3.25pt; vertical-align:top"><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold">Document signed by:</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">DANIEL AGUILAR MENDEZ, JUDGE/DECISION-MAKER</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">ROBERTO GARITA NAVARRO, JUDGE/DECISION-MAKER</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">SILVIA FERNÁNDEZ BRENES, JUDGE/DECISION-MAKER</span></p></td></tr></table><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt"><span>&#xa0;</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri">1</span></p><p style="margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt"><span style="font-family:Arial">&#xa0;</span></p>

Firmar Documento *160107381027CA* TRIBUNAL PROCESAL CONTENCIOSO ADMINISTRATIVO, Central: 2545-00-03 Fax: 2545-00-33 Correo Electrónico ...01 CONOCIMIENTO Y MEDIDA CAUTELAR ACTOR:

Nombre12949 EL ESTADO RESOLUCIÓN N° 39-2019 - VI TRIBUNAL DE LO CONTENCIOSO ADMINISTRATIVO Y CIVIL DE HACIENDA - SECCIÓN SEXTA- SEGUNDO CIRCUITO JUDICIAL DE SAN JOSÉ. Goicoechea, a las once horas cincuenta minutos del cinco de abril del dos mil diecinueve.- Proceso de conocimiento declarado de puro derecho, incoado por Nombre12949 , portador de la cédula de identidad número CED10346, representado por Rolando Segura Ramírez, en condición de apoderado especial judicial, contra EL ESTADO, representado por Marianella Barrantes Zamora, en su condición de Procuradora.-

CONSIDERANDO:

I.- ASPECTOS PRELIMINARES, DELIBERACIÓN Y VOTO.- A partir del pasado 08 de octubre entró en vigencia la Ley N° 9342, correspondiente a la reforma total del Código Procesal Civil, que a su vez es el cuerpo normativo que regula las formalidades de las resoluciones jurisdiccionales, por lo que el presente fallo se adapta a las nuevas disposiciones legales, según se observa en el transitorio I de dicha Ley y conforme con el Artículo 2.18 de la circular de Corte Plena número 96-2018 "Normas Prácticas para la Aplicación del Nuevo Código Procesal Civil", adoptada en el artículo XII de la sesión número 38-18 del 13 de agosto de 2018. Asimismo, se hace ver a las partes que por haberse tramitado parcialmente en forma digital la gestión que se resuelve, se hacer constar que los autos se ajustan además a lo dispuesto en el reglamento sobre Expediente Judicial Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial, aprobado por Corte Plena en el artículo XXXI de la sesión N° 22-13, celebrada el 20 de mayo de 2013. De conformidad con los numerales 10 y 11 de dicho Reglamento, se aclara que en caso de citarse número de foliatura o imagen de algún documento perteneciente al expediente judicial, se refiere a folios físicos o escaneados de manera previa a la entrada en funcionamiento del expediente electrónico en el Despacho. Para hacer referencia a los documentos ingresados con posterioridad a ese momento, se indicarán únicamente su fecha de presentación o producción. Igualmente y de conformidad con el principio de equivalencia funcional establecido en el numeral 11 de ese Reglamento, se hace ver a las partes que resulta ajustado a Derecho el uso de extractos digitales de documentos digitalizados aportados por las partes al expediente judicial, pues según esa norma “…tienen la misma fuerza probatoria de los originales…”. Por último, se deja constancia de que se emite esta resolución una vez realizada la respectiva deliberación, con la redacción del voto a cargo del informante, juzgador Aguilar Méndez, con la opinión y voto concurrente de las personas juzgadoras Garita Navarro y Silvia Fernández.- II.- PRUEBA PARA MEJOR RESOLVER.- Los artículos 82.1 y 110 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo, en relación al 41.3 del Código Procesal Civil (Ley N° 9342), otorgan al Tribunal Decisor amplias facultades de incorporar la prueba que estime conveniente, sea que las partes hayan realizado o no una propuesta formal de la misma, una vez finalizados los momentos procesales oportunos para ello (en caso del proceso contencioso administrativo, entiéndase con la demanda, contestación de la demanda, audiencia de contra prueba o réplica y en audiencia preliminar). En ese sentido, por resolución dictada a las 15:19 horas del 20 de marzo anterior este Tribunal estimó de interés para la resolución de este asunto, contar en la comunidad probatoria con el documento correspondiente con la acción de personal número 201605-MP-2079381 fechada 15 de noviembre de 2016, aportada a los autos con la contestación del Estado a la solicitud de medida cautelar, dado que dicho elemento no formaba parte del elenco de prueba admitida en la audiencia preliminar. Conforme las potestades indicadas antes, se otorgó audiencia a las partes a fin de garantizar el contradictorio y con éste, el respeto a los derechos de defensa y debido proceso, siendo que ninguna de las partes se ha opuesto a su admisión. Así las cosas, se estima de parte del Tribunal que dicha probanza resulta pertinente para efectos de resolver este proceso, porque allí consta información relevante sobre el período de nombramiento del actor. En consecuencia, lo que corresponde en Derecho es admitir esta prueba oficiosa en condición de prueba para mejor resolver, con lo cual queda incorporada a la comuna probatoria, a fin de poder darle el valor que corresponda de conformidad con el análisis de fondo que, en adelante, se efectuará.- III.- -OBJETO DEL PROCESO Y ALEGATOS DE LAS PARTES.- En el caso concreto, la parte actora ha incoado una acción cuyas pretensiones, según se determinó en la audiencia preliminar llevada a cabo el día 16 de junio de 2014, consisten en lo siguiente: “…PETITORIA SOBRE EL PROCESO PRINCIPAL: Con base en los argumentos de hecho y Derecho expuestos, solicito a su Autoridad se acoja lo siguiente: 1. Se declare la nulidad absoluta del acto administrativo dictado por la Ministra de Educación Pública mediante resolución 1532-2016 de las 14:00 horas del 5 de mayo del 2016, así como se declare la nulidad absoluta de la resolución 2444-2016 de las 8:00 horas del 6 de julio de 2016 dictado por el Ministro de Educación a.i., así como por conexidad se supriman los actos anteriores y posteriores que dependan de éstos actos. 2. Se declare la existencia de prescripción de la acción para ejercer la potestad disciplinaria de la Administración sobre mi poderdante, y que se pretendió ejercer a través de los actos administrativos 1532-2016 y 2444-2016 dictados por el Ministerio de Educación Pública. 3. Producto de la declaratoria de nulidad solicitada, se ordene la reinstalación en el cargo de Profesor, al señor Nombre12949 , y se le reconozcan los montos consistentes en el pago de salarios caídos y diferencias salariales que no haya percibido producto de la pérdida de su nombramiento. 4. Se indemnicen los daños y perjuicios que se producen como consecuencia directa e inmediata del acto ilegal de destitución del cargo de mi poderdante; así como las costas procesales y personales y sus respectivos intereses…”. La parte actora fundamenta estos pedimentos en los siguientes alegatos: 1.- Estima que acorde con el numeral 603 del Código de Trabajo, en su versión vigente a la fecha de los hechos, a la Administración le prescribió el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria; 2.- Violación a los derechos al debido proceso y de defensa, por lo siguiente: a) el acto inicial del procedimiento carece de motivación, b) la presunción de tenerlo por allanado, c) se omitió la indicación de los recursos pertinentes, d) se aplicó un procedimiento administrativo sui generis; y 3.- Vicios en el motivo del acto, toda vez que sí existió una causa justificada y comprobada de la ausencia, la cual fue comunicada oportunamente a la Jefatura, y que en todo caso, no configuraba falta grave alguna que ameritara la aplicación de la sanción más gravosa. Por su parte, la representación del Estado contestó negativamente y de este modo, opuso la excepción de falta de Derecho, aduciendo que sí se aplicó el procedimiento legalmente previsto, previa comprobación de la falta imputada, esto es, las ausencias injustificadas a trabajar, sin que existiera comunicación o conocimiento inmediato del patrono sobre estas circunstancias, según lo dispuesto en el artículo 8.b) del Reglamento a la Ley de Carrera Docente. Añade que, muestra de la irresponsabilidad en el comportamiento del actor, es su descuido en atender en tiempo el traslado de cargos del procedimiento disciplinario, el cual contestó tardíamente. Manifiesta que en el procedimiento administrativo se atendió el tema de la prescripción y que además, se ha dado una falta de credibilidad de las diversas razones que fueron dadas de su parte para intentar justificarse. Concluye que en este caso, el despido realizado fue ordenado por parte del órgano competente, mediante resolución fundada y adecuadamente notificada de modo que resulta improcedente la demanda planteada, incluyendo así los daños y perjuicios reclamados. Solicita que se declare sin lugar la demanda y se condena al Nombre12950 al pago de ambas costas.- IV.- HECHOS PROBADOS.- De importancia para el dictado de esta resolución, se tienen los siguientes hechos como debidamente demostrados, sea que así consten en las pruebas aportadas en el expediente o porque las partes así los han aceptado:

• 1)El señor Nombre12949 , fue designado interinamente para ocupar el puesto número 433464 en el Ministerio de Educación Pública, para el período comprendido entre los días 01 de febrero de 2016 al 31 de enero de 2017, en el cargo de Profesor de Enseñanza Técnico Profesional y destacado en las escuelas Linda Vista, código 2718 y San Isidro, código 2869, pertenecientes al circuito de Educación número 04-Miramar, Montes de Oro, Puntarenas, de la Dirección1590 (hechos no controvertidos, f. 14 y 15 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 2) El señor Nombre12949 no se presentó a trabajar los días 09 a 12 de febrero de 2016 (hechos no controvertidos, f. 1 a 14 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 3) Por medio de oficio número ESC San Isidro-012-2016 y ESC L.V. 006-2016, fechado 17 de febrero de 2016, los directores de las escuelas Linda Vista y San Isidro de la Dirección Regional de Puntarenas, los señores Luis Ángel Jiménez González y Henry Otárola Zamora, respectivamente, comunicaron a la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública la inasistencia del señor Nombre12949 a dichos centros educativos (f. 14 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 4) Mediante resolución administrativa número 678-2016 de las 09:20 horas del 25 de febrero de 2016, la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública emitió el acto inicial y la designación como órgano director del procedimiento administrativo disciplinario en contra del funcionario Nombre12949 , a la funcionaria Lizbeth Acosta Campos, en virtud de las ausencias antes descritas según le había sido informado de parte de los Directores de escuelas Linda Vista y San Isidro (f. 17 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 5) Mediante resolución de fecha 29 de febrero de 2016, la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública emite traslado de cargos al funcionario Nombre12949 , en donde le intima las ausencias a trabajar y se las imputa como faltas graves que podrían acarrear una sanción que “…podría ir desde una suspensión sin goce de salario de hasta 30 de días, hasta el cese de interinidad sin responsabilidad patronal…”. Asimismo, en dicho acto se le emplaza para que ejerza su derecho de defensa en un plazo de diez días hábiles conforme el artículo 69 del Estatuto del Servicio Civil (f. 18 y 19 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 6) Por medio de correos electrónicos remitidos por la funcionaria Lisbeth Acosta Campos, en su condición de instructora del procedimiento disciplinario, a las 11:13 a.m. del Dirección1591 y 11:41 a.m. del lunes 28 de marzo, ambas fechas del año 2016 (f. 24 y 22 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ), dirigidos a los funcionarios Henry Otárola Zamora y Luis Ángel Jiménez, directores de las escuelas Linda Vista y San Isidro de la Dirección Regional de Puntarenas, les comunicó que debían proceder con la notificación del traslado de cargos del funcionario Nombre12949 , tal y como se puede apreciar en los siguientes extractos digitales de los documentos aquí descritos:--------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 7) A las 7:10 am y 5 pm del día 29 de marzo de 2016, se notificó en los centros educativos San Isidro y Linda Vista, respectivamente, al funcionario Nombre12949 , el traslado de cargos dentro del procedimiento administrativo disciplinario seguido en su contra (ver actas de notificación a folios 30 y 33 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 8) El día 15 de abril de 2016 fue recibido en el Departamento de Asuntos Disciplinarios de la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública, escrito del funcionario aquí Nombre12950 en el que procedía a contestar los cargos en cuestión (hecho no controvertido y f. 34 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 9) Mediante resolución administrativa número 1532-2016 de las 14:00 horas del 05 de mayo de 2016, la Ministra de Educación Pública resolvió: “…Cesar de su interinidad y sin responsabilidad para el Estado al servidor Nombre12949 , de calidades conocidas en autos por haberse acreditado que incurrió en faltas graves en el ejercicio de sus funciones…”. Este acto quedó notificado al señor Nombre12949 en fecha 23 de mayo de 2016 (f. 39 a 35 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 10) El día 25 de mayo de 2016 fue recibido en el Departamento de Asuntos Disciplinarios de la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública, recurso de reposición interpuesto por parte del señor Nombre12950 en contra de la resolución n° 1532-2016 (hecho no controvertido y f. 46 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); 11) Por medio de resolución administrativa n° 2444-2016 de las 08:00 horas del 06 de julio de 2016, el Ministro de Educación Pública a.i. resolvió el recurso de reposición incoado en los siguientes términos: “….I. Declarar sin lugar la excepción de prescripción interpuesta en el escrito recursivo del fecha 25 de mayo de 2016, por parte del servidor Nombre12949 […] II. Declarar sin lugar el Recurso de Revisión planteado por el servidor Nombre12949 , contra la Resolución N° 1532-2016…”. Este acto quedó notificado al señor Nombre12949 en fecha 26 de julio de 2016 (hecho no controvertido y f. 52 a 47 de la copia digital certificada del expediente administrativo n° 69-2016 a nombre del funcionario Nombre12949 ); y 12) El día 13 de mayo de 2016, el señor Nombre12949 fue cesado del puesto n° 433464 que ocupaba de manera interina (ver acción de personal n° 201605-MP-2079381 fechada 15 de noviembre de 2016, admitida como prueba para mejor resolver).- V.- HECHOS NO PROBADOS.- De utilidad para el presente fallo se tienen por no demostrados los siguientes hechos, sea porque las partes incumplieron sus cargas probatorias, o bien, porque el Despacho no halló prueba idónea que, a la luz de la sana crítica, permitiera acreditarlos:

1.- La extensión por más de veinte años de la relación de empleo público sostenida entre el señor Nombre12949 y el Estado, a través del Ministerio de Educación Pública, en la cual el primero se desempeñó como docente en condición de interino; 2.- La fecha exacta en que la Dirección de Recursos Humanos del Ministerio de Educación Pública recibió el oficio número ESC San Isidro-012-2016 y ESC L.V. 006-2016, fechado 17 de febrero de 2016, suscrito por los directores de las escuelas Linda Vista y San Isidro de la Dirección Regional de Puntarenas; y 3.- La existencia y cuantía de extremos económicos de la relación de empleo público sostenida entre el señor Nombre12949 y El Estado, distinta a la de los salarios dejados de percibir y su actualización monetaria, a la que hubiera tenido derecho producto del cese injustificado de su nombramiento interino.- VI.- SOBRE EL ELEMENTO TEMPORAL EN EL EJERCICIO DE LAS POTESTADES CORRECTIVAS ADMINISTRATIVAS DE CORTE DISCIPLINARIO.- En las relaciones funcionariales, el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria o correctiva del jerarca frente a los funcionarios que han cometido faltas sancionables se encuentra sujeto a un factor de temporalidad, luego del cual, tal ejercicio no podrá ser emprendido. Este límite temporal, según se verá, varía según se trae de la materia regulada y de la existencia de un régimen jurídico especial que configure reglas particulares para tipos específicos de relaciones de empleo público. En consecuencia, podemos afirmar que esa potestad disciplinaria (que se basa en la doctrina del ordinal 102 LGAP) no es irrestricta en el tiempo. A diferencia de otras potestades públicas que por aspectos finalistas, se consideran imprescriptibles -v.gr., tutela de bienes demaniales-, las que se refieren al ejercicio sancionatorio interno -como el que se examina en este caso- están sujetas a reglas de temporalidad en virtud de lo cual, puede fenecer por el decurso del tiempo establecido por el ordenamiento jurídico sin concretarlas. Por ende, en este tipo de relaciones, el titular del poder disciplinario o correctivo es el jerarca administrativo y el sujeto pasivo el funcionario público, quien en esa medida, se encuentra sujeto a la potestad correctiva interna solo por el plazo que expresamente fije la normativa aplicable, vencido el cual, emerge su facultad de requerir el reconocimiento de la pérdida de la potestad jerárquica. Se trata de un asunto librado a la discrecionalidad del legislador, quien determina en cada caso si se trata de una prescripción o una caducidad del eventual ejercicio de esas potestades. Desde este plano, en la prescripción liberatoria, se impone la concurrencia de tres factores fundamentales, a saber: a) inercia del titular de un derecho en su ejercicio, b) transcurso del tiempo fijado por el ordenamiento jurídico en esa inercia del titular y; c) alegación o excepción del sujeto pasivo de la relación jurídica de hacer valer la prescripción. Con todo, en materia de empleo público, la prescripción negativa bien puede ser alegada como causal de nulidad del acto final sancionatorio, aún y cuando esa defensa no hubiere sido ejercitada de previo a la emisión de la voluntad pública. Así, la potestad disciplinaria o correctiva no puede considerarse como una de carácter imprescriptible, tratando de justificar esa deducción en la regla del numeral 66.1 de la LGAP, sino que se trata de una sujeta a reglas de preclusión por factores temporales, según se visualiza en el inciso 3) de ese mismo numeral 66 LGAP. Asimismo, tratándose de actuaciones de la Administración Pública en procedimientos administrativos sancionatorios, resulta fundamental lo estatuido por el ordinal 329.3 de la LGAP que señala: "3. El acto final recaído fuera del plazo será válido para todo efecto legal, salvo disposición en contrario de la ley." De suerte que cuando una disposición legal fije la pérdida o preclusión de la competencia, el acto dictado en ejercicio de esa potestad ya fenecida, no podría ser tenido como válido. En ese sentido y en el marco general de prescripción de la potestad correctiva y disciplinaria, esta Sección del Tribunal de lo Contencioso Administrativo ha sido consistente en considerar que existen diversos supuestos o reglas de ejercicio temporal de estas potestades. Esta diferenciación, que dicho sea de paso, toma como base la fase del procedimiento de la que se trate, permite un abordaje más preciso del tema en discusión, ya que en efecto el ordenamiento jurídico otorga un trato diverso según esas etapas al límite temporal para el ejercicio de dicha potestad varía, acorde con las notas características de cada una de ellas. En ese sentido y retomando el caso concreto, la representación de la parte actora ha venido a restringir en su teoría del caso, el alegato de prescripción de la potestad disciplinaria a una supuesta parálisis del procedimiento acaecida en su inicio, desde la fecha en que ocurrieron los hechos disciplinados o bien, desde el momento en que el órgano competente posea conocimiento de la falta y la notificación del traslado de cargos, es decir, estamos frente a una posible situación de prescripción del ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria. Este supuesto se refiere al plazo que fija el ordenamiento jurídico para que el titular de la potestad correctiva interna adopte las medidas procedimentales del caso y que le permitan emitir la decisión final. En este plano, se trata del plazo máximo incoado por el ordenamiento jurídico para que el jerarca administrativo disponga la apertura del procedimiento pertinente, direccionado a establecer la pertinencia o no de la imposición de una sanción. De esta manera, la notificación de la apertura del procedimiento que busca el establecimiento de los hechos (verdad real) que sirven de base al motivo del acto, genera un efecto interruptor de ese margen de temporalidad, en la medida en que consiste en un acto expreso y una medida que directamente propende al ejercicio de esa potestad. No podría considerarse que el citado plazo del ejercicio de la potestad sólo se interrumpe con el dictado del acto final, pues como derivación del principio del debido proceso, es menester que la Administración disponga la apertura de una causa administrativa, para establecer si corresponde o no establecer la sanción, como derivación de lo establecido en los ordinales 214, 221, 297 y 308 LGAP. En esta hipótesis y en consideración de esta Cámara, la potestad disciplinaria del jerarca administrativo se encuentra sujeta al plazo prescriptivo, que se encuentra regulado en el artículo 603 del Código de Trabajo (aplicable por remisión expresa del canon 51 del Estatuto de Servicio Civil –ESC-), norma vigente al momento de los hechos y acorde con lo establecido en el Transitorio II de la Ley N° 9343 del 25 de enero de 2016, ley de “Reforma Procesal Laboral”. Dice el artículo en cuestión: “…Los derechos y acciones de los patronos para despedir justificadamente a los trabajadores o para disciplinar sus faltas prescriben en un mes, que comenzará a correr desde que se dio causa para la separación o, en su caso, desde que fueron conocidos los hechos que dieron lugar a la corrección disciplinaria…” (Resaltado no es del original). De esta manera, podemos afirmar que en efecto el plazo para que opere la prescripción de la potestad disciplinaria es de un mes, el cual queda interrumpido necesariamente con la comunicación efectiva del traslado de cargos al interesado. Valga aclarar que lo anterior es sin perjuicio de las faltas que se encuentren reguladas por normas especiales, tales como las expresadas por el régimen de control interno, probidad en la función pública y gestión de la hacienda pública, en los cuales, acorde a lo regulado por la Ley General de Control Interno, No. 8292 (art. 43), Ley contra la Corrupción y Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la función pública, No. 8422 (art. 44) y el artículo 71 de la Ley Orgánica de la Contraloría General de la República, No. 7428, normas en las que opera un plazo especial, según los supuestos y desde los momentos en que esas normas disponen. Ahora bien, resulta determinante el punto de partida del cómputo de ese plazo prescriptivo. Sobre el particular, el numeral 603 del Código de Trabajo señala que el plazo corre desde que se dio la causa para la separación o en su defecto, desde que fueron conocidos los hechos que dieron lugar a la corrección disciplinaria. En este sentido, el plazo se computa desde el momento en que el titular de la potestad correctiva se encuentra en posibilidad objetiva de conocer la falta y por ende, emprender el ejercicio de su potestad. Por ende, cuando las particularidades del caso exijan la realización de una etapa previa de investigación preliminar, el plazo aludido corre desde el momento en que se ponga en conocimiento del jerarca, los resultados de ese ejercicio. Es el caso además de faltas que sean evidenciadas en informes de Auditoría Interna, pero cuya prosecución para efectos de sancionar, deban ser sometidas al jerarca respectivo. En tal escenario, el plazo señalado se computa desde el momento de la recepción o comunicación efectiva al jerarca de dicho informe, pues es hasta ese momento, que ese titular puede válidamente adoptar las decisiones respecto de la apertura o no de disposiciones disciplinarias. Con todo, debe discriminarse en cada caso la necesidad o no de esa fase (investigación preliminar), pues de otro modo, podría utilizarse como estrategia para evadir la prescripción, siendo que no en todos los escenarios esa investigación sería necesaria, sino solo aquellos en que por las particularidades del caso, sea indispensable para determinar la pertinencia o no de la apertura del procedimiento sancionatorio, o bien, para recabar indicios que propendan a clarificar su necesidad o no. Tratándose de las relaciones reguladas por el Régimen de la Carrera Docente, Título II ESC, ese marco normativo establece un procedimiento de atención de denuncias que podrían dar base a la imposición del régimen disciplinario. En ese sentido, el ordinal 65 del ESC establece que toda queja o denuncia deberá ser presentada ante el jefe inmediato del agente involucrado, quien según la gravedad de la supuesta falta, la reservará para su conocimiento o bien la remitirá al Departamento de Personal del Ministerio de Educación Pública, quien en el supuesto de que “…hallare mérito, ordenará la inmediata investigación de cargos…”. Estas acciones igualmente pueden instruirse de oficio. Por su parte, acorde al numeral 66 ejusdem, si la presunta falta pudiera implicar advertencia escrita, el jefe inmediato podrá proponer al Director del Departamento de Personal para que resuelva en definitiva. Cuando el jefe inmediato se informare sobre una falta que no fuere de su competencia, deberá remitir el asunto a conocimiento directo del Departamento de Personal. A tono con lo preceptuado por el numeral 69 de ese cuerpo legal, cuando de la instrucción del caso no resultare mérito para continuar con las diligencias, el Departamento de Personal, por acto motivado, podrá disponer el archivo del expediente; caso contrario, deberá formular por escrito los cargos a intimar, dando traslado al agente público por un espacio de 10 días, plazo dentro del cual, deberá presentar sus alegaciones de descargo. Evacuadas las pruebas (artículos 70-71 ESC), el Departamento de Personal pasará el expediente al Tribunal de la Carrera Docente para que este órgano defina lo que corresponda -art. 71-, a efectos de lo cual, verificada la inexistencia de nulidades en la causa, deberá emitir su decisión en el plazo de 8 días prorrogables. Cuando la recomendación del Tribunal de la Carrera Docente fuera el despido del funcionario (a), a tono con los preceptuado por el mandato 75 del ESC, satisfechos los trámites referidos, corresponde al Ministro, dentro del plazo de un mes (dispuesto por el artículo 74 ibídem), presentar la gestión respectiva ante el Tribunal de Servicio Civil. El detalle de ese curso pone en evidencia que la prescripción para iniciar las acciones disciplinarias se computa desde el momento en que el titular de esa potestad se encuentre en posibilidad objetiva (o deber) de su ejercicio. En el caso concreto, y dado que no se ha tenido por demostrada la fecha exacta en la que fue recibida la comunicación contenida en el oficio n° ESC San Isidro-012-2016 y ESC L.V. 006-2016, es criterio del Tribunal que el momento a partir del cual comenzó a transcurrir el plazo prescriptivo antes indicado, ocurrió el día 25 de febrero de 2016, fecha en la que la Dirección de Recursos Humanos emitió la resolución de inicio del procedimiento administrativo disciplinario, circunstancia en la que este Tribunal coincide que objetivamente se encontraba la Administración en la posibilidad razonable de ejercer la potestad disciplinaria. De conformidad con las reglas para el conteo de plazos dispuestas en el Código Procesal Civil, aplicable supletoriamente, sean los numerales 146 de la Ley N° 7130 o el 30.5 de la Ley N° 9342: “…Los plazos por años o meses se contarán según el calendario, sea, de fecha a fecha…”, de manera tal que el período del mes venció el día 25 de marzo de 2016, sin que para ese instante hubiera operado interrupción del mismo por práctica de la notificación del traslado de cargos, lo cual ocurrió hasta el día 29 de marzo, es decir, cuatro días después de acaecida la prescripción para el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria. Por tal motivo, el acto posterior mediante el cual la Ministra de Educación Pública dispuso concretar el cese del actor, se produjo cuando esa instancia jerárquica no contaba ya con la competencia para hacerlo, debido al fenecimiento del plazo para poder ejercitar dicha potestad. En relación con la tesis sostenida por el Estado como parte de su defensa de falta de Derecho, la misma resulta improcedente en criterio de este Tribunal, por cuanto la parte actora sí adujo durante el transcurso del procedimiento administrativo la prescripción de la potestad disciplinaria, concretamente durante la fase recursiva, con motivo del recurso de reposición (hecho probado número 9) y por tanto, sin que aún se contara con una decisión administrativa en firme; aunque valga decir –como ya se señaló-, que en este tema no resulta imprescindible su oposición en el procedimiento como requisito para decretar la prescripción. De esta manera y conforme lo antes indicado, debe declararse entonces prescrita la potestad disciplinaria o correctiva cuyo ejercicio concluyó con el dictado del acto por el que se cesó al señor Nombre12949 de su nombramiento interino, decretado por medio de la resolución administrativa de la Ministra de Educación Pública número 1532-2016 de las 14:00 horas del 05 de mayo de 2016, confirmado posteriormente mediante el rechazo al recurso de reposición incoado por el señor Nombre12949 , por medio de resolución n° 2444-2016 de las 08:00 horas del 06 de julio de ese mismo año y por consiguiente, lo que corresponde en Derecho es declarar la nulidad de ambos actos, al carecer la Administración de competencia para emitir ese acto sancionatorio. En razón de la nulidad que se declara, se omite entonces pronunciamiento respecto de las alegaciones de fondo promovidas por la parte accionante, al carecer de utilidad alguna para este fallo.- VII.- SOBRE LA REINSTALACIÓN Y DEMÁS EXTREMOS DE LA DEMANDA.- Según ha quedado acreditado (hecho probado número 01), el señor Nombre12950 fue designado interinamente en el puesto número 433464 ubicado en el Ministerio de Educación Pública, para el período comprendido entre los días 01 de febrero de 2016 y 31 de enero de 2017. Así las cosas, la posibilidad de reinstalación en ese tipo de puestos y el reconocimiento de emolumentos laborales en relación con esos futuros nombramientos no es procedente, en atención precisamente a la naturaleza provisional de la designación interina. Sobre este punto, pueden observarse las razones desarrolladas por el Tribunal de Casación de lo Contencioso Administrativo en el voto número 82-F-TC-2013 de las 14:00 horas del 22 de agosto de 2013, en el cual conoció el reclamo de una servidora interina del Poder Judicial, respecto de la cual se dispuso la nulidad del acto de cese de nombramiento, al igual que en el presente caso. En esa ocasión, estableció ese Alto Tribunal: “…es importante dejar claro que consecuencia de la ilegalidad de un despido, es la restitución del funcionario al puesto que ocupaba, empero, esta regla debe ser aplicada exclusivamente para aquellos servidores que venían ocupando puestos en propiedad y no de forma interina. Lleva razón el recurrente en este extremo, incluso cuando indica que el Tribunal apreció indebidamente el oficio no. 0251-DRL-11 de la Dirección Regional de Limón, referente a que el nombramiento de la señora Nombre12951. lo era hasta el 30 de junio de 2010. En este tanto, es claro que el funcionario interino goza de una estabilidad pero de carácter relativo, lo que se traduce en que no tiene el derecho subjetivo a que se le prorrogue el nombramiento en forma indefinida, por lo que no tendría derecho a la reinstalación al menos durante el tiempo que no estuvo nombrado. El hecho de que su puesto haya sido prorrogado desde el 2008, no le da derecho a ser considerada como una servidora de tiempo indefinido, ya que su posición era de interina. Tampoco existe un expectativa válida de que iba a ser nombrada nuevamente, puesto que de igual forma era previsible que a partir de la finalización de su designación, el Organismo decidiera (en virtud de los problemas que se le acusaban), no renovarle su nombramiento. De hecho, aquí gravitan los puntos que esta Sala cuestiona; primero, el OIJ debió preocuparse por nombrar el titular de la plaza que ocupaba la agente Nombre12951., máxime si estaba siendo cuestionada; o en su defecto, esperar que su nombramiento venciera y prescindir de sus servicios (mediante determinación debidamente fundamentada) ya que el interino no disponía derecho alguno de ser nombrado en forma indefinida, bastaba que el tiempo expirara para dar por terminada la relación de trabajo. En todo caso, el hecho de actuar de otra forma, no le daba ni el derecho al OIJ de revocar intempestivamente el nombramiento de la actora (en plena vigencia); y tampoco a la señora Nombre12951., la posibilidad de ser reinstalada en el puesto. Consecuentemente, tampoco tendría la opción de recibir salarios desde el cese de funciones, hasta una efectiva reinstalación, ya que esta última posibilidad resulta improcedente debido a que su nombramiento lo era hasta una fecha determinada. Lo que sí le corresponde, es una indemnización de los salarios dejados de percibir, desde el despedido (13 de mayo de 2010 según el oficio 511-DG-10) hasta el final de su nombramiento (30 de junio de 2010), bajo los términos y condiciones establecidas en la sentencia, sea descontando las cargas legales que correspondan e indexando esas sumas…” (Resaltado no es del original) Por consiguiente, resulta improcedente la reinstalación tal y como ha sido pretendida, ya que las situaciones jurídicas que nacieron a la vida jurídica con el acto de designación, estaban sujetas a término y por tanto, al finalizar éste las mismas fenecieron, de modo que no es posible acceder a lo pedido. Finalmente, en relación con los extremos indemnizatorios, en primer lugar, debe aclararse que conforme lo dispuesto en el transitorio I de la Ley N° 9343 (“Reforma Procesal Laboral”), así como el numeral 98.2 CPCA, al haberse llevado a cabo en este asunto la audiencia preliminar el día 23 de mayo de 2017, esto es, previo a la entrada en vigencia de esa Ley, este pronunciamiento se hará acorde con las reglas anteriores a dicha reforma, pues tratándose este asunto uno de puro Derecho, esta Cámara estima que dicha audiencia cumple el rol de la audiencia de pruebas a la que refiere la norma transitoria. De este modo, lo que corresponde en Derecho conforme a los artículos 190 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, 44 del Estatuto de Servicio Civil y 82 del Código de Trabajo, y a falta de precisión en sus alegatos, pretensiones y la respectiva demostración por parte de la representación de la parte actora -pese a constituir su carga procesal-, tanto en la demanda como durante la audiencia preliminar, se condena al Estado al pago de una indemnización (“a título de daños y perjuicios”) equivalente a los salarios dejados de percibir desde el 13 de mayo de 2016 hasta el hasta el 31 de enero de 2017, comprendiendo este concepto los estipendios periódicos (por ejemplo, salario base, pluses u otros extremos económicos) que le hubieran correspondido durante dicho plazo y según la escala salarial que fije el ordenamiento jurídico para el desempeño de las funciones que tenía a su cargo en el puesto n° 433464 del cual fue cesado indebidamente. De dichas sumas deberá deducirse, si correspondiere, lo relativo al impuesto sobre la renta por actividad personal dependiente (impuesto al salario), el que deberá ser reportado al Ministerio de Hacienda, así como lo atinente al régimen de aportaciones de la Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, del sistema de jubilaciones y pensiones y demás deducciones salariales. Por tratarse de una obligación dineraria y como parte de la cuantificación de las sumas brutas de los salarios dejados de percibir, deberá aplicarse el mecanismo de indexación dispuesto en el numeral 123 CPCA, desde el momento en que eran exigibles esas sumas según el calendario para el pago de salarios de la Administración Central para aquellas fechas, hasta su efectivo pago, de manera tal que el señor Nombre12949 pueda recibir un pago actualizado, así como en aras de garantizar que las deducciones respectivas se realicen a valor presente. Dado que la gestión de la información correspondiente a estos rubros le compete a la Administración demandada y dado que ésta no aportó a los autos la misma (carga dinámica de la prueba – Art. 41.1 CPC Ley N° 9342), la condena al pago de estos rubros deberá ser realizada excepcionalmente en términos abstractos, según lo faculta el artículo 122.m.ii) CPCA, de manera que sólo su cuantificación queda reservada para la etapa de ejecución de sentencia. Tomen nota las partes que este pronunciamiento es sin perjuicio de la posibilidad de que dichos rubros puedan ser liquidados en vía administrativa, resolución alterna de conflictos o en sede jurisdiccional (ejecución), quedando la Administración obligada a su pago con independencia de la existencia o no de una resolución liquidatoria proveniente de los jueces de la etapa de ejecución de sentencia. No se concede ningún otro extremo económico que hubiera podido desprenderse de la relación de empleo público, toda vez que la representación del Nombre12950 no adujo, ni estableció un pedimento concreto, ni tampoco prueba idónea que permitiera acreditar fehacientemente la existencia de derecho alguno que hubiera ameritado percibir, todo esto a tenor de los artículos 58.1.e), 82 y 119 CPCA, 41.1.1, 41.5 y 62.1 CPC (Ley N° 9342), 82 del Código de Trabajo, 44 del Estatuto del Servicio Civil y 190 y 196 LGAP.- VIII.- RESPECTO DE LAS PRETENSIONES Y LAS EXCEPCIONES INCOADAS.- Conforme la fundamentación expuesta anteriormente, se acogen las pretensiones numero uno y dos y en consecuencia, se declara la nulidad absoluta de los actos administrativos consistentes en las resoluciones administrativas número 1532-2016 de las 14:00 horas del 05 de mayo y número 2444-2016 de las 08:00 horas del 06 de julio, ambas del año 2016 y emitidas por el Despacho del Ministro de Educación Pública, por las cuales se cesó al señor Nombre12949 de su nombramiento interino en el puesto número 433464, precisamente, al haber operado la prescripción para el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria o correctiva. Se acoge parcialmente las peticiones contenidas en las pretensiones número tres y cuatro, específicamente, en cuanto a la condenatoria al pago de una indemnización consistente en los salarios dejados de percibir y su actualización monetaria (indexación), correspondientes al período restante del nombramiento interino y que no pudo percibir producto de la conducta administrativa cuya invalidez y subsecuente nulidad absoluta son aquí declaradas. Se desestima la acción en cuanto a la reinstalación pretendida, esto al haber expirado el plazo del nombramiento del actor, y respecto de cualesquiera otros rubros por concepto de “daños y perjuicios”, dado el incumplimiento de la parte interesada de su respectiva carga procesal, en concreto de su debida y precisa alegación y comprobación, resultando improcedente que este Tribunal sustituya su labor, en particular con base en los artículos 119 CPCA y 61.2 CPC (Ley N° 9342). En consecuencia, la excepción de falta de Derecho opuesta por la representación del Estado resulta parcialmente procedente, únicamente en cuanto a los extremos de la demanda que han sido denegados, rechazándose en lo demás; de manera tal, que lo ajustado en Derecho es acoger parcialmente la acción como en efecto se ordena.- IX.- SOBRE LAS COSTAS Y SUS INTERESES.- De conformidad con los artículos 193 del Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo y 73 del Código Procesal Civil (Ley N° 9342), la condena al pago de las costas constituyen una obligación que se impone a la parte perdidosa por el hecho de serlo, en beneficio de la vencedora, a fin de reintegrarle a ésta las diversas categorías de gastos allí enlistados. Ambos numerales prevén diversas causales de dispensa de esta condenatoria, por lo que en ausencia de alegatos o pruebas que permitan a este Tribunal, en el caso concreto, ponderar y tener por acreditado alguno de estos motivos, no es posible entonces excepcionar total o parcialmente a la parte vencida de la aplicación de dicha máxima, por lo que conforme a las normas de cita, lo debido es imponer la condena a la parte vencida. En aplicación supletoria de lo dispuesto en los artículos 61.2, 62.1 y 76.1 del Código Procesal Civil (Ley N° 9342), toda vez que en ese asunto la cuantía de la condenatoria se realiza en abstracto y por tanto, pendiente de liquidación en fase de ejecución de sentencia, corresponderá en esa etapa llevar a cabo la determinación del importe de las costas, tomando para ello como base el total de la condenatoria, así como la liquidación y las pruebas correspondientes que deberán ser aportadas a los autos por la parte vencedora. En lo concerniente a los pretendidos intereses sobre las costas, en atención a que esta obligación accesoria sólo resulta procedente una vez insatisfecha una obligación dineraria principal líquida y exigible (artículos 706, 773 y 1163 Código Civil) y en aras de garantizar que su reconocimiento quede garantizado por vía de la intangibilidad de la cosa juzgada, pese a que en el caso concreto no existe aún una deuda dineraria que reúna dichas características, lo que corresponde es su otorgamiento igualmente en abstracto, sujeto a la eventual liquidación que la parte victoriosa deberá presentar en el momento procesal oportuno en que concurran esas circunstancias.-

POR TANTO:

SE ACOGE PARCIALMENTE LA EXCEPCIÓN DE FALTA DE DERECHO opuesta por la representación del ESTADO.- En consecuencia, SE DECLARA PARCIALMENTE CON LUGAR la demanda incoada por Nombre12949 contra EL ESTADO. Se declara entonces la nulidad absoluta de los actos administrativos consistentes en las resoluciones administrativas número 1532-2016 de las 14:00 horas del 05 de mayo y número 2444-2016 de las 08:00 horas del 06 de julio, ambas del año 2016 y emitidas por el Despacho del Ministro de Educación Pública, al haber operado la prescripción para el ejercicio de la potestad disciplinaria o correctiva. Se condena en abstracto al Estado al pago de una indemnización a favor de la parte actora, equivalente a los salarios dejados de percibir desde el día 13 de mayo de 2016 hasta el hasta el 31 de enero de 2017, comprendiendo este concepto los estipendios periódicos (por ejemplo, salario base, pluses u otros extremos económicos) que le hubieran correspondido durante dicho plazo y según la escala salarial que fije el ordenamiento jurídico para el desempeño de las funciones que tenía a su cargo en el puesto n° 433464. De dichas sumas deberá deducirse, si correspondiere, lo relativo al impuesto sobre la renta por actividad personal dependiente (impuesto al salario), el que deberá ser reportado al Ministerio de Hacienda, así como lo atinente al régimen de aportaciones de la Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social, del sistema de jubilaciones y pensiones y demás deducciones salariales. Por tratarse de una obligación dineraria y como parte de la cuantificación de las sumas brutas de los salarios dejados de percibir, deberá aplicarse el mecanismo de indexación dispuesto en el numeral 123 CPCA, desde el momento en que eran exigibles esas sumas según el calendario de pago de salarios de la Administración Central para aquellas fechas. La exclusiva cuantificación de estos rubros queda entonces reservada para la etapa de ejecución de sentencia.- Se condena a la parte vencida al pago total de las costas y sus intereses en los términos expuestos en el Considerando IX de esta sentencia.- El resto de pretensiones se deniegan por resultar jurídicamente improcedentes.- Notifíquese.- Daniel Aguilar Méndez Roberto Garita Navarro Silvia Fernández Brenes 1