T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u0130D\u0130L SAF\u0130YE SOYSE\u00c7K\u0130N CEYLAN BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3443)<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 13\/3\/2025<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ay\u015fenur TUNCER<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u0130dil Safiye SOYSE\u00c7K\u0130N CEYLAN<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Candan DUMRUL KADIYORANO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, kamudaki g\u00f6revine iade edilirken ataman\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6reve yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesi Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken 29\/4\/2017 tarihli ve 689 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 Tedbirler Al\u0131nmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname (689 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) kapsam\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu’na (Komisyon) ba\u015fvurmu\u015f, Komisyon 24\/7\/2019 tarihli karar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun talebini kabul ederek kamu g\u00f6revine iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurulu Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Y\u00d6K) Y\u00fcr\u00fctme Kurulu 21\/8\/2019 tarihli karar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun Aksaray \u00dcniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji Anabilim Dal\u0131na \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak atanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesindeki kadrosuna atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 5\/8\/2019 tarihinde Y\u00d6K Personel Daire Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvurmu\u015f olupba\u015fvurunun z\u0131mnen reddi \u00fczerine an\u0131lan i\u015flemin iptali talebiyle Ankara 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. An\u0131lan davada ba\u015fvurucu, dava konusu i\u015fleme dayanak yap\u0131lan 1\/2\/2018 tarihli ve 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu Kurulmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnamenin De\u011fi\u015ftirilerek Kabul Edilmesine Dair Kanun’un 10. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa’ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek Anayasa Mahkemesine ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme 11\/6\/2020 tarihinde davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. An\u0131lan kararda, ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k itiraz\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesinde y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan \u00f6\u011fretim elemanlar\u0131n\u0131n Komisyon taraf\u0131ndan kamu g\u00f6revine iade karar\u0131 al\u0131nmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bunlar\u0131n atama tekliflerinin Ankara, \u0130stanbul, \u0130zmir illeri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ve 2006 y\u0131l\u0131ndan sonra kurulan y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131na \u00f6ncelik verilmek kayd\u0131yla Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurulu Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumu haricinde tespit edilecek y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131ndan birine \u00f6nceki kadro unvanlar\u0131na uygun olarak yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 hususunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6rev yapmak istedi\u011fi \u00fcniversite, fak\u00fclte, b\u00f6l\u00fcm ve anabilim dal\u0131 tercihlerinin al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun ilk s\u0131radaki tercihi olan Aksaray \u00dcniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji AnabilimDal\u0131na \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde g\u00f6reve ba\u015flat\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvurunun 7075 say\u0131l\u0131Kanun’un 10. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca reddedildi\u011fi belirtilerek idarece tesis edilen dava konusu i\u015flemde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu karara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130stinaf dilek\u00e7esinde; Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esiz reddedildi\u011fini, eski g\u00f6rev yerine atanma talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle istifa etmek zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ilgili kanun maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131yla masumiyet karinesinin ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma h\u00fcrriyetinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ankara B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi 4. \u0130dari Dava Dairesi (B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi) 19\/11\/2020 tarihinde kararda usul ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kesin olarak reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 1\/12\/2020 tarihinde tebell\u00fc\u011f ettikten sonra 30\/12\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. Komisyonca 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
8. Ba\u015fvurucu; dava konusu idari i\u015flemin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan ilgili maddenin Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesine ra\u011fmen bu iddian\u0131n incelenmedi\u011fini, eski g\u00f6rev yerine ba\u015flat\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle hakk\u0131ndaki \u015f\u00fcphelerin tam olarak ortadan kalkmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 izlenimi verildi\u011fini, bu durumun meslek hayat\u0131nda ki\u015fisel geli\u015fimini, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerle olan ili\u015fkilerini ve itibar\u0131n\u0131 olumsuz etkiledi\u011fini, yeni g\u00f6rev yerinde bu nedenlerle istifa etmek zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu; g\u00f6revine iade edilirken daha \u00f6nceki \u00fcniversitedeki g\u00f6revine atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle kanunilik ilkesinin, e\u015fitlik ilkesinin, masumiyet karinesinin, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zel hayata ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
9. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; somut olay\u0131n ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir \u00f6zeti yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra mevcut ba\u015fvuruda ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi konusunda inceleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda, ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 yerdeki pozisyonuna atanmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesinin meslek hayat\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerle ili\u015fki kurabilme ve geli\u015ftirebilme imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde zay\u0131flatmas\u0131na, sosyal ve mesleki itibar\u0131n\u0131 koruyabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ciddi sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmektedir. Bu durumda sonuca dayal\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131m kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurunun \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenebilir nitelikte oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, B. No: 2020\/9103, 28\/2\/2024, \u00a7 25; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, B. No: 2020\/5774, 15\/11\/2023, \u00a7 25; Abdulkadir Tuncay, B. No: 2019\/35343, 30\/3\/2022, \u00a7 39; Tamer Mahmuto\u011flu, [GK], B. No: 2017\/38953, 23\/7\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 84-90).<\/p>\n
11. 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 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
12. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesi Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim eleman\u0131 olarak atanmamas\u0131n\u0131n dayana\u011f\u0131 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda bahsi ge\u00e7en ve kamu g\u00f6revine iade edilen personelin daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131klar\u0131 yer ve Ankara, \u0130stanbul, \u0130zmir illeri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u00f6zellikleri maddede belirtilen y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131ndan birine atanaca\u011f\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcd\u00fcr (U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 33; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7 33).<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa Mahkemesi U\u011fur Co\u015fkun ve Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu kararlar\u0131nda genel ilkeleri belirleyerek ba\u015fvuru konusu olayla benzer i\u015flemlere ili\u015fkin kararlar vermi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan kararlarda Anayasa Mahkemesinin 30\/6\/2022 tarihli ve E.2018\/137, K.2022\/86 say\u0131l\u0131 iptal karar\u0131yla g\u00f6revlerine iade edilen \u00f6\u011fretim elemanlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6rev yerleri ile Ankara, \u0130stanbul ve \u0130zmir illerinde bulunan y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131na atanmalar\u0131na kategorik yasak getiren ve bu ki\u015filerin \u00f6ncelikli olarak 2006 y\u0131l\u0131ndan sonra kurulan y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim kurumlar\u0131nda istihdam edilmelerini \u00f6ng\u00f6ren kural\u0131n iptal edildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fcniversiteye atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin kanuni dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturan 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n iptal karar\u0131 nedeniyle kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Somut olayda da Komisyon taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revine iade edilen ba\u015fvurucunun daha \u00f6nce g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fcniversiteye atamas\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi bizzat 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesi ile yasaklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi; benzer \u015fik\u00e2yetleri ele ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu ve U\u011fur Co\u015fkun kararlar\u0131nda, an\u0131lan iptal karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esini de g\u00f6zeterek \u00f6zel hayata m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7eren 7075 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 10. maddesinin muhataplar\u0131n\u0131 yetki a\u015f\u0131m\u0131na ve keyf\u00eeli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 koruyabilecek niteli\u011fe ve a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle m\u00fcdahalenin kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulayarak \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir (U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7\u00a7 36-38; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7\u00a7 36-38). Eldeki ba\u015fvuru y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu ve U\u011fur Co\u015fkun kararlar\u0131nda yer alan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvuruya konu m\u00fcdahalenin kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z konusu m\u00fcdahale a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan di\u011fer g\u00fcvence \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerine riayet edilip edilmedi\u011finin ayr\u0131ca de\u011ferlendirilmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir (Ayn\u0131 y\u00f6nde de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. U\u011fur Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 38; Mertihan Kurdo\u011flu, \u00a7 38).<\/p>\n
15. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi ve 50.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen anayasal hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar ve zorunluluk bulunmaktad\u0131r. Anayasa’n\u0131n 148. ve 153. maddeleri ile 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 50. ve 66. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flat\u0131p Anayasa Mahkemesinin ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere ve gerek\u00e7elere uygun bi\u00e7imde y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek yarg\u0131lama sonunda hak ihlalinin nedenlerini gidererek yeni bir karar vermektir (yeniden yarg\u0131lama konusunda bkz. 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
18. \u00d6te yandan hak ihlali karar\u0131ndan Anayasa Mahkemesinin davan\u0131n sonucuyla ilgili olarak bir tutum sergiledi\u011fi sonucu \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r.Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen hak ihlali karar\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olup davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, reddine ya da beraate veya mahk\u00fbmiyete karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmemektedir. Kural olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere yeniden yap\u0131lacak yarg\u0131lama sonunda da delillerin dava ile ili\u015fkisini kurma ve bunlar\u0131 de\u011ferlendirip sonu\u00e7 \u00e7\u0131karma yetkisi ilgili mahkemelere aittir.<\/p>\n
19. \u00d6te yandan ba\u015fvurucu, tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015f ise de ihlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM <\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2019\/2256, K.2020\/1049) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 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
F. \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
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin bilgi i\u00e7in Ankara B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi 4. \u0130dari Dava Dairesi (E.2020\/2419, K.2020\/2876) ile Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 13\/3\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 13\/3\/2025 tarihli ve 2021\/3443 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR \u0130D\u0130L SAF\u0130YE SOYSE\u00c7K\u0130N CEYLAN BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3443) Karar Tarihi: 13\/3\/2025 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Ay\u015fenur TUNCER Ba\u015fvurucu : \u0130dil Safiye SOYSE\u00c7K\u0130N CEYLAN Vekili : Av. Candan DUMRUL KADIYORANO\u011eLU I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, kamudaki g\u00f6revine iade edilirken ataman\u0131n \u00f6nceki g\u00f6reve yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesi Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji Anabilim Dal\u0131nda \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken 29\/4\/2017 tarihli ve 689 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 Tedbirler Al\u0131nmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname (689 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) kapsam\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc H\u00e2l \u0130\u015flemleri \u0130nceleme Komisyonu’na (Komisyon) ba\u015fvurmu\u015f, Komisyon 24\/7\/2019 tarihli karar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun talebini kabul ederek kamu g\u00f6revine iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurulu Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Y\u00d6K) Y\u00fcr\u00fctme Kurulu 21\/8\/2019 tarihli karar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun Aksaray \u00dcniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fak\u00fcltesi Sosyoloji B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Genel Sosyoloji ve Metedoloji Anabilim Dal\u0131na \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak atanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00c7ank\u0131r\u0131 Karatekin \u00dcniversitesindeki kadrosuna atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 5\/8\/2019 tarihinde Y\u00d6K Personel Daire Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvurmu\u015f olupba\u015fvurunun z\u0131mnen reddi \u00fczerine an\u0131lan i\u015flemin iptali talebiyle Ankara …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-147829","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n