The programmer of UAPROM LLC appealed in court the inaction of the state body, which for a long time did not enter data on the presence of reservations in the registers. How it happened — further.
The programmer of UAPROM LLC appealed in court the inaction of the state body, which for a long time did not enter data on the presence of reservations in the registers. How it happened — further.
On August 6, the Poltava District Administrative Court considered the case on the programmer’s administrative claim to, presumably, the CCC (it is the CCC that is responsible for entering data on the status of those liable for military service into state registers) for recognizing the inaction as unlawful and for the obligation to consider the plaintiff’s application, verify the facts set forth in it, make a decision in accordance with current legislation, and notify the plaintiff in writing about the consequences of considering the application.
The claims are based on the fact that the plaintiff, being on military registration and officially employed, is booked according to an extract from the order of the Ministry of Economy on the booking of military conscripts and the electronic military registration document «Reserve+», and therefore is not subject to conscription for military service during mobilization.
On July 10, 2024, the programmer, in connection with the adoption of amendments to the Law of Ukraine «On Mobilization Training and Mobilization», updated his military conscript’s account data in the administrative services center, without violating the established period of 60 days from the date of entry into force of the amendments to the Law of Ukraine «On Mobilization Training and Mobilization».
On August 20, 2024, he submitted an application with attachments confirming his reservation, namely: a copy of an extract from the order of the Ministry of Economy on the reservation of a conscript and a copy of the electronic military registration document «Reserve+», to the CCC with a request to confirm or refute his presence on special registration as a reserved conscript.
On September 5, 2024, a lawyer’s request was submitted to consider the above-mentioned application regarding the reservation of an IT worker, to which a response was received on September 10, 2024, stating that the information about the reservation is not confirmed by anything.
The plaintiff considers this response to be unfounded, indicating that the defendant, as a subject of authority, after receiving the plaintiff’s application and documents confirming the right, should have taken appropriate actions to draw up the relevant decision as a result of considering this application, but the defendant limited itself to sending the plaintiff only a letter.
The lack of a properly executed decision on the issue of reservation from conscription for military service during mobilization or a motivated response, according to the plaintiff, indicates the unlawful inaction of the subject of public authority and the existence of grounds for satisfying the claims.
In his response to the statement of claim, the defendant requested to refuse to satisfy the claims in full, citing the fact that, according to the military registration data available in the department, the IT worker, starting from November 8, 2012 (the moment of registration of those liable for military service), did not conduct a reconciliation/clarification of the registration data and/or information about his stay at the dispensary registration at the place of residence was not provided by medical and preventive institutions, therefore there are grounds to consider the conscripted programmer suitable for military service.
According to the CCC, the specialist did not report any changes in employment, since an unemployed person is not subject to reservation, as stated in the responses to the requests of the plaintiff’s lawyers. There, the programmer was recommended to personally come to the Department to reconcile/clarify his registration data with the entry of information into the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Military Enlisted Persons and Reservists and to make clarifications to the military registration document, however, these recommendations were ignored by the plaintiff.
The court accepted the claim for consideration on October 9, 2024. On December 23, he reconfirmed that he indeed had a reservation, documented.
The court clarified that the programmer is indeed a military conscript and is on military registration. However, he does have a reservation, as he is an employee of the capital’s LLC «UAPROM», for six months until September 20, 2024.
The plaintiff’s military registration document with «Reserve+» was formed on July 10, 2024, on August 20, he applied to the head of the CCC, in which he stated that he was not subject to military service during mobilization and requested to update the data on his reservation.
However, the CCC decided that there were grounds to consider the programmer suitable for mobilization, since he did not report a change of place of work and
Considering the defendant’s inaction to consider the application for entering data regarding his reservation to be unlawful, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit with the court.
The court decided to satisfy the IT worker’s claim, recognizing the defendant’s inaction, and ordered the CCC to enter data on his postponement into the register, considering the programmer’s redundancy.
The decision may be appealed to the Second Administrative Court of Appeal by filing an appeal within thirty days from the date of the full court decision.
