Majority
Headnote
L Municipal .Corporations—Civil Service—Competitive Examinations— “Regular Clerks.”The relator was, on December 31, 1902, appointed to the position of complaint clerk of the police department of the city of New York, which position was at the time, and has since remained, in the exempt class of the classified service, according to the classification of the municipal civil service commission. He was removed from his position by the defendant without a compliance with section 1543 of the charter (chapter 466, p. 636, of the Laws of 1901), which, so far as material, provides:
' “But no regular clerk or head of a bureau, or person holding a position in the classified municipal civil service subject to competitive examination, shall
be removed until he has been allowed an opportunity of making an explanation ; and in every case of a removal, the true grounds thereof shall be forthwith entered upon the records of the department or board or borough president, and a copy filed with the municipal civil service
Upon a former appeal in this case it was held that mandamus, and not quo warranto, was the proper remedy. People ex rel. Corkhill v. McAdoo, 98 App. Div. 312 , 90 N. Y. Supp. 689 . The issues raised by the return to the alternative writ have now been tried, with the result that the relator has a final order and judgment directing that a peremptory writ of issue to compel his reinstatement. The only question that appears to have been litigated upon the trial was whether the position of the relator was confidential, or that of a regular clerk, and the test applied, apparently by the acquiescence of all parties, was whether the duties of the position were confidential. There does not seem to have been any serious dispute as to the nature of these duties, but the question was nevertheless submitted to the jury, which found that the relator’s duties were not confidential. ,
In order to decide this case, it is necessary to construe the provision of the statute quoted supra, which is a re-enactment of section 28, c. 335, p. 491, of the Laws of 1873, with the addition of the words “or person holding a position in the classified municipal civil service subject to competitive examination.” The meaning of the words “regular clerk” has been passed upon in People ex rel. Sims v. Fire Commissioners, 73 N. Y. 437 , and People ex rel. v. Board of Fire Commissioners, 86 N. Y. 149 , which held that the words were used in their popular sense, and included only such positions as did not require any other qualification than the ability to perform purely clerical work. There was no such thing as a classified civil service at the time of the act in 1873, and the addition of the words quoted last above is doubtless accounted for by the classifications provided for by the civil service law, now chapter 370, p. 795, of the Laws of 1899, and I think the expression added includes the former. The Constitution provides (article 5, § 9), that merit and fitness for positions in the civil service shall be ascertained, “so far as practicable, by examinations, which, so far as practicable, shall be competitive.” In harmony with this constitutional provision, section 12 of the civil service law provides for classification in the exempt class of all positions “for the filling of which competitive or noncompetitive examination may be found to be not practicable,” and the test prescribed by the Court ot Appeals as to the practicability of an examination is whether the duties are of a confidential character. Chittenden v. Wurster, 152 N. Y. 345 , 46 N. E. 857 , 37 L. R. A. 809 . No reason can be suggested for asserting that a competitive examination is not practicable impositions whose duties are purely clerical, and, as we have seen, those whose duties are more than merely clerical are not “regular clerks.” Of course, the statute must contemplate that all positions in the civil service will be subject to competitive examination, unless such examination is impracticable, and it must, therefore, follow that the expression “person holding a position in the classified municipal civil service subject to competitive examination” was intended to include every “regular clerk.”
The judgment and order should be reversed, and the proceedings dismissed.
Judgment and order reversed, with costs, and proceedings dismissed, with costs. All concur.
Cases cited
- People ex rel. Corkhill v. McAdoo 98 App. Div. 312 p. 325
- People ex rel. Sims v. Board of Fire Commissioners 73 N. Y. 437 p. 325
- People ex rel. Emerick v. Board of Fire Commissioners 86 N. Y. 149 p. 325
- Chittenden v. Wurster 152 N. Y. 345 p. 325
- People ex rel. Schau v. McWilliams 185 N. Y. 92 p. 326