Civil Service Commission’s decision concerning the fitness of a candidate for appointment final unless found irrational or arbitrary
Rogan v Nassau County Civ. Serv. Commn, 2012 NY Slip Op 00217, Appellate Division, Second Department
A candidate in Nassau County”s Police Officer Examination No. 7000 failed to attain a passing score on the physical fitness screening test.
The candidate sue, contending that the Commission acted irrationally or arbitrarily and capriciously in relying upon a proctor's assessment that the candidate failed to complete the number of sit-ups required to pass the physical fitness screening test promulgated by the State’s Municipal Police Training Council.
Supreme Court denied his petition and the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
The Appellate Division, noting that “An appointing authority* has wide discretion in determining the fitness of candidates,” explained that such discretion is particularly broad in the hiring of law enforcement officers, to whom high standards may be applied.”
A court, said the Appellate Division, “may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency responsible for making the determination and, as long as the administrative determination is not irrational or arbitrary and capricious, [it] may not annul it.”
* Although this decision may give the reader the impression that the Commission was the appointing authority with respect to police officers, a Civil Service Commission is the agency responsible for determining the eligibility of candidates seeking appointment to positions in the competitive class of the classified service by examination and then certifying those found eligible and qualified to the appointing authority for selection for appointment to the position. [People v Gaffney, 201 NY 535]
The decision is posted on the Internet at:
