T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
ERHAN \u00d6ZDEM\u0130R BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/37002)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 30\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Osman KODAL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Erhan \u00d6ZDEM\u0130R<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Vedat KARABACAK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131na etkili iddian\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu 2009 y\u0131l\u0131ndan beri engelli kadrosuyla daval\u0131 i\u015fveren Hava Alanlar\u0131 Yer Hizmetleri A.\u015e. b\u00fcnyesinde kontuvar biriminde bagaj etiket yap\u0131\u015ft\u0131rma ve bagajlar\u0131 yerle\u015ftirme i\u015finde \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma saatlerinin d\u00fczenli olmamas\u0131 ve daha a\u011f\u0131r i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in Kayseri \u015eehir Hastanesi Ba\u015fhekimli\u011finden 10\/1\/2019 tarihinde sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporu alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu raporda ba\u015fvurucunun uzun s\u00fcre y\u00fcr\u00fcmekte zorland\u0131\u011f\u0131; a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli olmayan i\u015f koluyla vardiyal\u0131 i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fabilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 10\/1\/2019 tarihli sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporunu daval\u0131 i\u015fverene sunmu\u015f, daha hafif i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 veya mesai saatlerinin daha d\u00fczenli olmas\u0131n\u0131 daval\u0131 i\u015fverenden talep etmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f akdini mevcut i\u015fyerinin a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli i\u015f kolunda bulundu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucuyu \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rabilecek daha hafif i\u015f olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle feshetmi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu, \u00f6nce zorunlu arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurmu\u015f; sonras\u0131nda da i\u015fe iade davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Kayseri 2. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) taraf\u0131ndan daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a feshin ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz oldu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6revlendirilebilece\u011fi farkl\u0131 birim bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 ilkesine uyuldu\u011funun ispat edilemedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren karara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur. Kayseri B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 7. Hukuk Dairesi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (\u0130stinaf Mahkemesi) ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda al\u0131nan sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporuna ve Yarg\u0131tay ve istinaf mahkemelerinin baz\u0131 i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131na at\u0131f yapm\u0131\u015f, i\u015fverenin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 feshin ge\u00e7erli fesih oldu\u011funu, hakl\u0131 fesih olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bu nedenle i\u015fverenin k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 \u00f6demekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc oldu\u011funubelirtmi\u015f, karar\u0131 kald\u0131rarak davan\u0131n reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Nihai karar ba\u015fvurucuya 27\/10\/2020 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu 23\/11\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
6. Komisyon, kabul edilebilirlik konusunda oybirli\u011fi sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu; a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fe iade davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul edildi\u011fini ancak \u0130stinaf Mahkemesinin karar\u0131 kald\u0131rarak davay\u0131 reddetti\u011fini, kendisiyle ayn\u0131 durumda olan ve tan\u0131k olarak dinlenen i\u015f\u00e7inin hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle daha hafif i\u015fte \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendisinin ise hastal\u0131\u011f\u0131 bahane g\u00f6sterilerek i\u015f akdinin sonland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 i\u015fverenin kendisini \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rabilece\u011fi ba\u015fka birimin oldu\u011funu, bu itibarla feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ilkesine uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u0130stinaf Mahkemesinin karar\u0131nda bu hususlar\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini belirterek e\u015fitlik ilkesi ile gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve bo\u015fta ge\u00e7en s\u00fcrede \u00fccret ve i\u015fe ba\u015flatmama tazminat\u0131na karar verilmemesi nedeniyle m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
8. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; \u0130stinaf Mahkemesinin gerek\u00e7esini ortaya koyarken yasan\u0131n i\u015fverene derh\u00e2l fesih hakk\u0131 tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan i\u015fverenin bildirim s\u00fcrelerine uyma ve ihbar tazminat\u0131 \u00f6deme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti\u011fi, ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kanun yolu \u015fik\u00e2yeti niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu, Anayasa Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lacak incelemede Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Anayasa Mahkemesi olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin niteli\u011fi g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden biri olan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
11. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvencesini de kapsamaktad\u0131r (daha geni\u015f de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. Abdullah Top\u00e7u, B. No: 2014\/8868, 19\/4\/2017, \u00a7 75). Nitekim Anayasa’n\u0131n 141. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131nda \u201cB\u00fct\u00fcn mahkemelerin her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kararlar\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli olarak yaz\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d denilerek mahkemelere kararlar\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli yazma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00fcklenmi\u015ftir. Mahkemelerin an\u0131lan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, yarg\u0131lamada ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen her t\u00fcrl\u00fc iddia ve savunmaya karar gerek\u00e7esinde ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 yan\u0131t vermesi gerekti\u011fi \u015feklinde anla\u015f\u0131lamaz. Ancak mahkemeler, kendilerine sunulan t\u00fcm iddialara yan\u0131t vermek zorunda de\u011filse de (Yasemin Ek\u015fi, B. No: 2013\/5486, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7 56) mahkemelerin davan\u0131n esas sorunlar\u0131n\u0131 inceledikleri gerek\u00e7eli karardan anla\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bir kararda tam olarak hangi unsurlar\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi davan\u0131n niteli\u011fine ve \u015fartlar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Muhakeme s\u0131ras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k ve somut bir bi\u00e7imde \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili, ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle davan\u0131n sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde davayla do\u011frudan ilgili olan bu hususlara mahkemelerce makul bir gerek\u00e7e ile yan\u0131t verilmesi gerekir (Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2013\/7800, 18\/6\/2014, \u00a7 35). Aksi bir tutumla mahkemenin davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili oldu\u011funu kabul etti\u011fi bir husus hakk\u0131nda ilgili ve yeterli bir yan\u0131t vermemesi veya yan\u0131t vermeyi gerektiren usul veya esasa dair iddialar\u0131 cevaps\u0131z b\u0131rakmas\u0131 hak ihlaline neden olabilecektir (Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 39).<\/p>\n
12. Yukar\u0131da belirtilen ilkeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucu i\u015fe iade davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f; Mahkeme daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a feshin ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz oldu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6revlendirilebilece\u011fi farkl\u0131 birim bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n dolay\u0131s\u0131yla feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 ilkesine uyuldu\u011funun ispat edilemedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin bu sonuca ula\u015f\u0131rken ba\u015fvurucu ile ayn\u0131 i\u015fyerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan tan\u0131k H.T.nin beyanlar\u0131ndan hareket etti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Tan\u0131k H.T. ba\u015fvurucunun bagaj y\u00fckleme b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde kontuvar i\u015f\u00e7isi olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015famaz raporu ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, farkl\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcmlerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmadan i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun hi\u00e7bir zaman daha hafif bir i\u015fte \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, s\u00fcrekli y\u00fckleme bo\u015faltma i\u015fi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir. Bununla birlikte ayn\u0131 tan\u0131k kendisinin de a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli i\u015fler yapamaz raporu oldu\u011funu, \u00fc\u00e7 ay s\u00fcreli \u00fc\u00e7 defa rapor ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yolcu y\u00f6nlendirme i\u015fleri yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131; ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7ay servisi, k\u0131yafet da\u011f\u0131t\u0131m\u0131, lojistik, u\u00e7ak temizli\u011fi gibi i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rabilece\u011fini, ba\u015fvurucudan sonra i\u015fe al\u0131nan engelli personelin lojistik b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu; yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 sa\u011fl\u0131k raporu nedeniyle i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daha hafif bir i\u015fte \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131p \u00e7al\u0131\u015famayaca\u011f\u0131 hususunun de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini halbuki raporu olan di\u011fer i\u015f\u00e7ilerin daha hafif i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f akdinin feshinin en son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 ilkesine uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme; ba\u015fvurucunun bu iddias\u0131yla ilgili herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirmede bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130stinaf Mahkemesi de ba\u015fvurucunun ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131na etkili iddiay\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmemi\u015f, sadece al\u0131nan sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporuna dayanarak mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131 kald\u0131rm\u0131\u015f ve davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla feshin son \u00e7are olmas\u0131 ilkesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ba\u015fvurucunun durumuna ili\u015fkin bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 suretiyle ba\u015fvurucunun uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonucuna etkili iddia ve itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n konu ile ilgili ve yeterli bir gerek\u00e7eyle kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlaline yol a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Di\u011fer taraftan bu ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n esas\u0131yla ilgili herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi vurgulanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Zira gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131, taraflara yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fckleri iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kurallara uygun bi\u00e7imde incelenip incelenmedi\u011fini bilmelerine imk\u00e2n sa\u011flayan bir hak olup yarg\u0131lama sonucuna y\u00f6nelik bir teminat sa\u011flamaz. Bu itibarla Anayasa Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtti\u011fi ihlal gerek\u00e7elerini g\u00f6zeterek ve s\u00f6z konusu iddiayla ilgili olarak yeniden bir de\u011ferlendirme yaparak gereken karar\u0131 vermek yine yarg\u0131lama mercilerinin takdirindedir.<\/p>\n
15. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama talebinde bulunmu\u015f, tazminat talep etmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasan\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin gerek\u00e7eli kararhakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczereKayseri B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 7. Hukuk Dairesi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (E.2020\/1426, K.2020\/912) iletilmek \u00fczere Kayseri 2.\u0130\u015f Mahkemesine (E.2019\/122, K.2020\/112) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.446.90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 30\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 30\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 30\/10\/2024 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 ERHAN \u00d6ZDEM\u0130R BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/37002) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 30\/10\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Osman KODAL Ba\u015fvurucu : Erhan \u00d6ZDEM\u0130R Vekili : Av. Vedat KARABACAK \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131na etkili iddian\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu 2009 y\u0131l\u0131ndan beri engelli kadrosuyla daval\u0131 i\u015fveren Hava Alanlar\u0131 Yer Hizmetleri A.\u015e. b\u00fcnyesinde kontuvar biriminde bagaj etiket yap\u0131\u015ft\u0131rma ve bagajlar\u0131 yerle\u015ftirme i\u015finde \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma saatlerinin d\u00fczenli olmamas\u0131 ve daha a\u011f\u0131r i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 i\u00e7in Kayseri \u015eehir Hastanesi Ba\u015fhekimli\u011finden 10\/1\/2019 tarihinde sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporu alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu raporda ba\u015fvurucunun uzun s\u00fcre y\u00fcr\u00fcmekte zorland\u0131\u011f\u0131; a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli olmayan i\u015f koluyla vardiyal\u0131 i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fabilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 10\/1\/2019 tarihli sa\u011fl\u0131k kurulu raporunu daval\u0131 i\u015fverene sunmu\u015f, daha hafif i\u015flerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 veya mesai saatlerinin daha d\u00fczenli olmas\u0131n\u0131 daval\u0131 i\u015fverenden talep etmi\u015ftir. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f akdini mevcut i\u015fyerinin a\u011f\u0131r ve tehlikeli i\u015f kolunda bulundu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucuyu \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rabilecek daha hafif i\u015f olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle feshetmi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu, …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25883","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n