EXAMPLE DECISION in Interview Victimization: Ankara 21st Administrative Court Cancellation on the Grounds of "Contrary to the Ordinary Flow of Life"!

Turk Eğitim Sen has achieved a new precedent-setting victory in its legal struggle against the victimization of contracted teachers in oral exams (interviews) conducted by the Ministry of National Education (MoNE). As a result of the lawsuit filed by the union lawyers, Ankara 21st Administrative Court canceled the process of rejecting the objection to the oral exam, finding it "contrary to the ordinary course of life" that the commission members gave the same scores.

The Case and the Role of the Union: The lawsuit was filed after the Ministry of National Education rejected the objection of a candidate who took the oral exam within the scope of 2024 Contracted Teacher Recruitment to the score of 83,66667. Turk Eğitim Sen provided legal support to the victim of the interview and demanded the annulment of the unfair and non-objective application in the scoring. The plaintiff claimed that although his KPSS score was high, he was unfairly scored compared to candidates from other provinces.

Rationale for the Court's Decision: Non-Objective Scoring In the reasoned decision of the Ankara 21st Administrative Court numbered 2025/27 Esas and 2025/1496 Karar, the court focused on the evaluation method of the commission members. When the court examined the file, it found that each member of the oral examination commission had awarded almost identical scores for five different evaluation criteria (educational sciences and general culture, expressive ability, communication skills, etc.).

The crucial point of the decision was:

"In the evaluation of the plaintiff in terms of each criterion, although all commission members evaluated the plaintiff separately, it is contrary to the ordinary course of life for the commission members to evaluate the same score for all criteria and almost all of the sub-criteria, therefore, since it is understood that the discretion is not used objectively, it is concluded that there is no compliance with the law in the subject of the lawsuit... transaction."

Importance of the Legal Gain: With this ruling, the Court ruled that the practice of "uniform scoring", which indicates that the commission members make separate scores in the oral exams as a formality and in reality reflects a common decision, is unlawful. The Administrative Court stated that this situation indicated that the administration used its discretionary power without objectivity and ruled for the cancellation of the rejection of the objection.

This decision sets an important precedent for other teacher candidates who have been victimized by similar interviews and is seen as a new turning point in the union's struggle for "merit, not interviews."