Anthony acknowledged that the court had on Oct 9 ruled Amarjit’s appointment was not in line with state laws.
“But he can still come to the office to do his work. At this moment, there is no order from the court for him to take leave or not to enter the office.
“If there is a ruling later that he needs to go on leave or anything else, we will accept it. But as of now, he is still the Sabah water department director,” he told reporters after an event here today.
On Oct 9, High Court judge Ravinthran Paramaguru said Amarjit’s appointment went against Section 3 of the Water Supply Enactment 2003, which states that only civil servants should be given senior positions at the Sabah Water Department.
Sabah Progressive Party president Yong Teck Lee and businessman Pang Thou Chung had filed the lawsuit last March seeking the court’s declaration on Amarjit’s status.
Previously, Chief Minister Shafie Apdal had also defended Amarjit’s appointment, saying the latter’s appointment may have contravened state laws but that the court did not rule the appointment as null and void.
“There is some kind of contravention but we will put it right to make sure everything is in order,” Shafie said.
Meanwhile, Yong said the Sabah government has yet to file any notice of appeal against the court’s declaration over Amarjit’s status.
He said it has been three weeks since the ruling. “The government and the illegal director now have only one week left to file their appeal.
“The filing of a notice is a simple matter that takes less than a day. But yet the government, like its other administrative functions, seems to be in paralysis,” he said in a statement today.
He was puzzled with the “slowness”, contending it is in stark contrast to the “super-efficient illegal appointment of the Water Department director last year”.
Yong said from the evidence adduced in court documents, the letter of recommendation from the state secretary to the Public Service Commission (PSC) was issued on July 30 last year.
“The letter was received by the PSC the following day during which it was processed and approved. And, within a single day, the PSC issued the appointment.
“The appointment was given super urgency and super efficiency even though the purported appointment was stated to be effective only on Aug 10 last year.”
Yong contended that it could be possible that other legal actions on the same matter will arise should the government continue to defy the Water Supply Enactment 2003 and the court’s declaration.
“These legal actions could result in the state secretary, the director of the establishment (responsible for the public service) and the PSC being subpoenaed to give evidence in open court on the very strange circumstances surrounding the illegal appointment of the Water Department director,” he said.