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
D.K. BA\u015eVURUSU (2)<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/64242)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 20\/11\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL<\/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
\u015eahap KAYMAK<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
D.K.<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Ali \u00c7EL\u0130K<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 <\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, yabanc\u0131 dil s\u0131nav\u0131nda al\u0131nan puan \u015f\u00fcpheli bulunarak \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 yap\u0131lan e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131l\u0131m sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle daha \u00f6nceki s\u0131nav sonucunun ge\u00e7ersiz say\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan davada uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131na ili\u015fkin iddialar kar\u015f\u0131lanmadan karar verilmesi nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
A. Bireysel Ba\u015fvurudan \u00d6nceki S\u00fcre\u00e7<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu, ilgili tarihte Nev\u015fehir Hac\u0131bekta\u015f \u00dcniversitesi E\u011fitim Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyal Bilimler ve T\u00fcrk\u00e7e E\u011fitimi B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde profes\u00f6r \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmaktad\u0131r. Do\u00e7entlik programlar\u0131na kabul edilmek i\u00e7in gerekli yabanc\u0131 dil puan\u0131n\u0131 (86,25 puan) 2008 y\u0131l\u0131nda girdi\u011fi \u00dcniversiteleraras\u0131 Kurul Yabanc\u0131 Dil S\u0131nav\u0131nda (\u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi) alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Di\u011fer \u015fartlar\u0131 da sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u00e7entlik program\u0131na kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucunun kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u0131navlara ili\u015fkin S.T. isimli \u015fah\u0131s taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan ihbar \u00fczerine \u00d6l\u00e7me, Se\u00e7me ve Yerle\u015ftirme Merkezi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (\u00d6SYM) taraf\u0131ndan inceleme ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6SYM \u0130hbar De\u011ferlendirme Komisyonunca yap\u0131lan incelemede, ba\u015fvurucunun 2002-2008 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda 10 yabanc\u0131 dil s\u0131nav\u0131na kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenmi\u015ftir. \u00d6SYM bu s\u0131navlardan en d\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 22,50 puan, 2008 \u00dcDS-1 s\u0131nav\u0131 hari\u00e7 en y\u00fckse\u011finin ise 38,75 puan oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. \u00d6SYM ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun s\u0131nav ortalamas\u0131n\u0131n 33,30 puan iken \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131ndan 86,25 puan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu s\u0131nav sonucunun hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Bu tespitlerden hareketle ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik 7\/2\/2018 tarihli \u00d6SYM Y\u00f6netim Kurulu karar\u0131 al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. \u00d6SYM S\u0131nav Hizmetleri Daire Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 13\/2\/2018 tarihli yaz\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucuyu e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 yaz\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n tebli\u011f edilmesi \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu i\u015flemin iptali talebiyle Ankara 10. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ankara 10. \u0130dare Mahkemesi dava konusu i\u015flemin iptaline karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; daval\u0131 idarece s\u0131navlardan al\u0131nan puanlar\u0131n k\u0131yaslamas\u0131 haricinde \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131n\u0131n \u015faibeli bulunmas\u0131 ile ilgili ba\u015fkaca bir bilgi ve somut gerek\u00e7e sunulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nceden ele ge\u00e7irdi\u011fi veyahut kopya \u00e7ekti\u011fi ya da s\u0131nav\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fc ile ilgili sorular\u0131n \u00f6nceden al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, toplu olarak kopya \u00e7ekildi\u011fi gibi herhangi bir durumun da saptanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenmi\u015ftir. Son olarak ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nceden girdi\u011fi s\u0131navlarda ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 notlar k\u0131yaslanarak i\u015flemin tesis edildi\u011fi, bu \u015fekilde yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmenin hukuk devleti ve hukuki g\u00fcvenlik ilkesini ihlal edece\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. \u00d6SYM taraf\u0131ndan bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine Dan\u0131\u015ftay 8. Dairesi, Mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; aday\u0131n e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in s\u0131nav sonu\u00e7lar\u0131nda ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulgulara rastlan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli oldu\u011fu, bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda aday\u0131n kopya \u00e7ekti\u011fine veya kendisi yerine bir ba\u015fka aday\u0131n s\u0131nava girdi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik herhangi bir tespitte bulunulmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun 2002-2008 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda toplam 10 kez kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yabanc\u0131 dil s\u0131nav sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 k\u0131yaslanmak suretiyle \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131nda ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 86,25 puan\u0131n ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 oldu\u011fu kabul edilerek e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131nda daval\u0131 idareye tan\u0131nan takdir yetkisinin kamu yarar\u0131 ve hizmet gereklerine uygun olarak kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B. Bireysel Ba\u015fvuruya Konu Yarg\u0131lama S\u00fcreci<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucunun 7\/2\/2018 ve 10\/12\/2019 tarihli \u00d6SYM Y\u00f6netim Kurulu kararlar\u0131yla e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen s\u00f6z konusu e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131navlara girmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi s\u0131nav sonucu \u00d6SYM Y\u00f6netim Kurulu’nun 25\/5\/2021 tarihli karar\u0131yla ge\u00e7ersiz say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu bu i\u015flemin iptali talebiyle Ankara 15. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme dava konusu i\u015flemin iptaline karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; ba\u015fvurucunun 12\/5\/2018 tarihinde yap\u0131lan s\u0131nava sa\u011fl\u0131k mazereti nedeniyle kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tekrar \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 27\/9\/2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lan s\u0131nava kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabit olmakla birlikte ayn\u0131 tarihte sa\u011fl\u0131k sorunu nedeniyle hastaneye ba\u015fvurdu\u011fu ve bu durumu 30\/9\/2020 tarihli dilek\u00e7esiyle tedavi g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne dair belgeyi de eklemek suretiyle \u00d6SYM’ye bildirdi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131lamamas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik mazeretinin hukuken ge\u00e7erli bir sebep olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun incelenmeksizin e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle s\u0131nav sonucunun ge\u00e7ersiz say\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuka uygunluk bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. \u00d6SYM taraf\u0131ndan an\u0131lan karara y\u00f6nelik olarak temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine Dan\u0131\u015ftay 8. Dairesi (Daire), Mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; ba\u015fvurucunun toplamda \u00fc\u00e7 kez e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen \u00f6zellikle s\u0131nav tarihlerine denk gelen d\u00f6nemlerde tekrarlayan bir \u015fekilde sa\u011fl\u0131k mazereti sundu\u011fu, 12\/5\/2018 ve 1\/12\/2019 tarihlerinde yap\u0131lan e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131navlarda s\u00f6z konusu mazeretin daval\u0131 idarece kabul edildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015f, ancak benzer mazeretle 27\/9\/2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lan s\u0131nava da kat\u0131lmayan ba\u015fvurucunun mazeretinin hakl\u0131 bir mazeret olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. 17\/2\/2011 tarihli ve 6114 say\u0131l\u0131 \u00d6l\u00e7me, Se\u00e7me ve Yerle\u015ftirme Merkezi Hizmetleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanunda aday\u0131n e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava tabi tutularak ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131k tespiti yap\u0131lan s\u0131nava y\u00f6nelik \u015f\u00fcphenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n ama\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131na i\u015faret edilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nav tarihlerine denk gelen sa\u011fl\u0131k mazeretinin e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava girme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ortadan kald\u0131rmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun, Daire taraf\u0131ndan temyiz incelemesinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarih itibar\u0131yla e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nav sonucunu sunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dile getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Bunun \u00fczerine \u00dcniversiteleraras\u0131 Kurul Y\u00f6netim Kurulu’nun 16\/2\/2022 tarihli karar\u0131yla, ba\u015fvurucuya verilmi\u015f olan do\u00e7entlik \u00fcnvan\u0131 ve 7\/4\/2010 tarihli do\u00e7entlik belgesi iptal edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 15\/12\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 28\/12\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu, e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131navdan yeterli bir puan alamamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde doktoras\u0131 ve sonras\u0131nda akademik \u00fcnvan\u0131n\u0131n geri al\u0131nmas\u0131 gibi mesleki hayat\u0131, ailesi ve \u00e7evresi ile ili\u015fkileri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00e7ok \u00f6nemli sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furacak bir i\u015fleme muhatap olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ma\u011fduriyet ya\u015fayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131nda ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 puan \u015f\u00fcpheli bulunarak e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lma i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 davada verilen nihai karara y\u00f6nelik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvurunun derdest oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir. Sa\u011fl\u0131k sorunlar\u0131 nedeniyle e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu duruma ili\u015fkin t\u0131bbi raporlar\u0131 idareye sundu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca kendisiyle ayn\u0131 durumda olan bir ba\u015fka ki\u015finin a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 davada farkl\u0131 karar verildi\u011fini belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. 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 (Tahir Canan, B. No: 2012\/969, 18\/9\/2013, \u00a7 16). Ba\u015fvuru, gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. 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
16. Anayasa Mahkemesi ayn\u0131 ba\u015fvurucunun somut ba\u015fvuru ile ayn\u0131 nitelikteki ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131 inceledi\u011fi D.K. karar\u0131nda (B. No: 2019\/32695, 10\/5\/2023) gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ihlal sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. An\u0131lan kararda Anayasa Mahkemesi, ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131lamaya ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ma\u011fdur s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011funu belirttikten sonra 6114 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 9. maddesinin (8) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince \u00d6SYM’nin ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulgular tespit etti\u011fi takdirde adaylar\u0131 e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rabilece\u011fine, e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nav uygulamas\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirmesine ili\u015fkin usul ve esaslara dair bir y\u00f6ntem belirlendi\u011fine i\u015faret etmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re yap\u0131lan inceleme neticesinde ba\u015fvurucunun kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 toplam 10 yabanc\u0131 dil s\u0131nav\u0131nda ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 puanlar, puan ortalamalar\u0131 ve kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 son iki s\u0131navdaki ba\u015far\u0131 grafi\u011fi dikkate al\u0131narak e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak s\u00f6z konusu y\u00f6ntem do\u011frultusunda soru kitap\u00e7\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n ve cevap anahtarlar\u0131n\u0131n tetkikinin yap\u0131lmayarak bu durumun gerek\u00e7esinin a\u00e7\u0131klanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir (D.K., \u00a7 23,24,25).<\/p>\n
17. Anayasa Mahkemesi verdi\u011fi ihlal karar\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fitli g\u00fcvenlik tedbirleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015f, ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi uzun y\u0131llar boyunca t\u00fcm kamusal makamlarca kabul edilmi\u015f ve ki\u015filere akademik yeterlilik elde etmeleri noktas\u0131nda \u00f6nemli hak veya menfaatler sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f bir s\u0131navla ilgili olarak ki\u015finin \u015f\u00fcpheli sonu\u00e7lar elde etti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde ortaya at\u0131lan iddian\u0131n ciddi bir \u015f\u00fcpheye yol a\u00e7\u0131p a\u00e7mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmi\u015ftir. 6114 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulgulara rastlanmas\u0131 kriterinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in basit ve soyut bir \u015f\u00fcphenin yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun s\u0131navda usuls\u00fczl\u00fck yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, yap\u0131lan bir usuls\u00fczl\u00fc\u011fe ortak oldu\u011funun veya sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan faydaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir usuls\u00fczl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yap\u0131lmas\u0131na g\u00f6z yumdu\u011funa ili\u015fkin bulgunun somut olarak ortaya konulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir (D.K., \u00a7 \u00a7 28, 29).<\/p>\n
18. Kararda ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucuya s\u0131navda usuls\u00fczl\u00fck yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k bir su\u00e7lamada bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucunun ilgili art\u0131\u015fla alakal\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fcyle anlams\u0131z veya g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f bir durum olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesinin de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lma i\u00e7in kanun taraf\u0131ndan aranan ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulgulara rastlanmas\u0131 kriterinin -\u00f6zellikle s\u0131nav\u0131n \u00fczerinden ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda- kar\u015f\u0131lanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funun s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Sonu\u00e7 olarak Anayasa Mahkemesi gerek \u00d6SYM’nin gerekse Dairenin ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131 ile ilgili olarak girdi\u011fi s\u0131navlar\u0131n ortalamas\u0131 ve son iki s\u0131nav\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki puan fark\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka hi\u00e7bir tespitte bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu tespitin kanun taraf\u0131ndan aranan ola\u011fan d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bulgu kriterini kar\u015f\u0131lamaya yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun davan\u0131n sonucuna ili\u015fkin temel iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir (D.K., \u00a7 30,31).<\/p>\n
19. Eldeki ba\u015fvuruda da ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi S\u0131nav\u0131 ge\u00e7ersiz say\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, bu i\u015flem ba\u015fvurucunun birden \u00e7ok kez sundu\u011fu sa\u011fl\u0131k mazeretinin art\u0131k hakl\u0131 bir mazeret olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi ve s\u00f6z konusu mazeretin e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava girme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc kald\u0131rmayaca\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle hukuka uygun bulunmu\u015ftur. Oysa Anayasa Mahkemesinin D.K. karar\u0131ndaki tespitler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde Dairenin bir de\u011ferlendirme yaparak neticeye varmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu itibarla somut ba\u015fvuruda da an\u0131lan karardan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektirir bir husus bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
20. \u00d6te yandan Daire karar\u0131nda hakl\u0131 mazeret olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen, ba\u015fvurucunun 27\/9\/2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lan e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava ayn\u0131 tarihteki g\u00f6\u011f\u00fcs a\u011fr\u0131s\u0131 \u015fik\u00e2yeti ile \u00f6zel bir hastanenin acil servisine ba\u015fvurmas\u0131 sebebiyle kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu durumu 30\/9\/2020 tarihli dilek\u00e7esi ile \u00d6SYM’ye bildirdi\u011fini belirtmesine ra\u011fmen s\u00f6z konusu hususun ger\u00e7ek olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin herhangi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da vurgulamak gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ve 50.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
22. 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
23. \u0130hlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun manevi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Kamuya a\u00e7\u0131k belgelerde ba\u015fvurucunun kimli\u011finin gizli tutulmas\u0131 talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
C. Anayasa’n\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
D. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak amac\u0131yla Dan\u0131\u015ftay 8. Dairesine (E.2021\/6728, K.2021\/5216) iletilmek \u00fczere Ankara 15. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2021\/1254, K.2021\/1413) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.487,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. \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
H. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 20\/11\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 20\/11\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/64242 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 D.K. BA\u015eVURUSU (2) (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/64242) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 20\/11\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL 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 : \u015eahap KAYMAK Ba\u015fvurucu : D.K. Vekili : Av. Ali \u00c7EL\u0130K \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, yabanc\u0131 dil s\u0131nav\u0131nda al\u0131nan puan \u015f\u00fcpheli bulunarak \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 yap\u0131lan e\u015fde\u011fer s\u0131nava kat\u0131l\u0131m sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle daha \u00f6nceki s\u0131nav sonucunun ge\u00e7ersiz say\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan davada uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131na ili\u015fkin iddialar kar\u015f\u0131lanmadan karar verilmesi nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. A. Bireysel Ba\u015fvurudan \u00d6nceki S\u00fcre\u00e7 2. Ba\u015fvurucu, ilgili tarihte Nev\u015fehir Hac\u0131bekta\u015f \u00dcniversitesi E\u011fitim Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyal Bilimler ve T\u00fcrk\u00e7e E\u011fitimi B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde profes\u00f6r \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmaktad\u0131r. Do\u00e7entlik programlar\u0131na kabul edilmek i\u00e7in gerekli yabanc\u0131 dil puan\u0131n\u0131 (86,25 puan) 2008 y\u0131l\u0131nda girdi\u011fi \u00dcniversiteleraras\u0131 Kurul Yabanc\u0131 Dil S\u0131nav\u0131nda (\u00dcDS 2008 Mart D\u00f6nemi) alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Di\u011fer \u015fartlar\u0131 da sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u00e7entlik program\u0131na kabul edilmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucunun kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu s\u0131navlara ili\u015fkin S.T. isimli \u015fah\u0131s taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan ihbar \u00fczerine \u00d6l\u00e7me, Se\u00e7me ve Yerle\u015ftirme Merkezi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (\u00d6SYM) taraf\u0131ndan inceleme ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6SYM \u0130hbar De\u011ferlendirme Komisyonunca yap\u0131lan incelemede, ba\u015fvurucunun 2002-2008 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda 10 yabanc\u0131 dil …<\/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-26699","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n