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
M. \u00d6. VE \u00d6. \u0130. A. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/22305)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 2\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 6\/3\/2025 – 32833<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/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
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Muhammed Cemil KANDEM\u0130R<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Ali BOZAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, dava konusu edilen i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011fran\u0131lan zarar\u0131n tazmini taleplerinin karara ba\u011flanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurular 8\/7\/2020 ve 14\/7\/2020 tarihlerinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurular, ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinin idari y\u00f6nden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n incelemesinden sonra Komisyona sunulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
4. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. B\u00f6l\u00fcm Ba\u015fkan\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin birlikte yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurulara konu yarg\u0131lama mercii kararlar\u0131n\u0131n ve ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n benzer olmas\u0131 nedeniyle 2020\/23423 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131n\u0131n 2020\/22305 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 ile birle\u015ftirilmesine ve incelemenin 2020\/22305 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ba\u015fvuruculara g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu \u00d6znur \u0130vrendi Arasan Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. OLAY VE OLGULAR <\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
9. 20\/11\/2017 tarihli ve 696 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin 127. maddesi ile 27\/6\/1989 tarihli ve 375 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’ye (375 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) eklenen ge\u00e7ici 23. maddede, kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131nda personel \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na dayal\u0131 hizmet al\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri kapsam\u0131nda y\u00fckleniciler taraf\u0131ndan 4\/12\/2017 tarihi itibar\u0131yla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmakta olanlara s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrolar\u0131na veya mahall\u00ee idare \u015firketlerinde i\u015f\u00e7i stat\u00fcs\u00fcne ge\u00e7me hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular da Akdeniz Belediye Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u00fcnyesinde hizmet al\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri kapsam\u0131nda ta\u015feron i\u015f\u00e7i olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktayken bu haktan yararlanmak \u00fczere s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7mek i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
10. Akdeniz Belediye Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Belediye \u015eirketi \u0130\u015f\u00e7i Al\u0131m Tespit Komisyonu, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n ar\u015fiv kayd\u0131 olmas\u0131 nedeniyle s\u0131nava girme hakk\u0131 kazanamad\u0131klar\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Bu i\u015flem ba\u015fvuruculara 7\/3\/2018 tarihli ve 227 say\u0131l\u0131 yaz\u0131yla bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucular 8\/3\/2018 tarihinde bu i\u015fleme itiraz etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n itirazlar\u0131 Mersin Valili\u011fi \u0130l Mahalli \u0130dareler M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 27\/3\/2018 tarihli karar\u0131yla reddedilmi\u015ftir. Karar Akdeniz Belediye Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 9\/4\/2018 tarihli yaz\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvuruculara bildirilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan karar \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri feshedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucular dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7elerinin sonu\u00e7 ve istem k\u0131sm\u0131nda (Benzer mahiyette oldu\u011fundan ba\u015fvurucu Mehmet \u00d6ks\u00fcz’\u00fcn dilek\u00e7esinden al\u0131nt\u0131 yap\u0131lmakla yetinilmi\u015ftir.) “Akdeniz Belediye Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 7\/3\/2017 tarih ve 227 say\u0131l\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7i\u015f talebinin reddine dair karar\u0131 ile davac\u0131n\u0131n bu karara yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz \u00fczerine09.04.2018 tarih ve … say\u0131l\u0131 yaz\u0131 ile bildirilen itiraz\u0131n reddine dair karar\u0131 ve daval\u0131 idarece an\u0131lan karar neticesinde davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin iptaline, i\u015flem nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131kta kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcreler i\u00e7inde yoksun kalaca\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n faizi ile birlikte \u00f6denmesi” talep edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Mersin 1. \u0130dare Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) kararlar\u0131nda davan\u0131n \u00f6zeti k\u0131sm\u0131nda s\u0131nava girme taleplerinin reddine ili\u015fkin 7\/3\/2018 tarihli i\u015flem ile bu i\u015fleme kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan itiraz\u0131n reddine dair i\u015flemlere yer vermi\u015f; ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin iptali ve bu i\u015flem nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131kta kalmalar\u0131 nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zarar\u0131n tazmini taleplerine ise yer vermemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Mahkeme, karar\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm k\u0131sm\u0131nda da dava konusu i\u015flemlerin iptaline ve ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n dava konusu i\u015flemler nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n tazmini talebinin kabul\u00fcne dair h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
i. Ba\u015fvurucu Mehmet \u00d6ks\u00fcz’e ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
” … davac\u0131n\u0131n atanma isteminde bulundu\u011fu idarenin, Yasada say\u0131lan kurumlardan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, b\u00fcnyesinde gizlilik \u00f6zelli\u011fi bulunan bir birim oldu\u011fundan da bahsedilemeyece\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n atanma talebinde bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6revin gizlilik dereceli bir g\u00f6rev olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve istihbari bilgi notunda yer alan de\u011ferlendirmelerin hukuken ge\u00e7erli ba\u015fka bilgi ve belgelerle somut olarak daval\u0131 idarelerce ortaya konulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde, istihbari bilgi notunda yer alan de\u011ferlendirmelere istinaden davac\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n olumsuz kabul edilerek s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna atanmas\u0131na dair ba\u015fvurusunun reddine ili\u015fkin dava konusu i\u015flemlerde hukuka uyarl\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00d6te yandan, dava konusu i\u015flemlerin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabit g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden davac\u0131n\u0131n bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n dava tarihinden itibaren yasal faiziyle birlikte tazmini gerekti\u011fi de a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. <\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, dava konusu i\u015flemlerin \u0130PTAL\u0130NE, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flem nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n dava tarihi olan 27.04.2018 tarihinden itibaren i\u015fletilecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131 idarelerden al\u0131narak davac\u0131ya verilmesine…”<\/p>\n
ii. Ba\u015fvurucu \u00d6znur \u0130vrendi Arasan’a ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“davac\u0131n\u0131n atanmak isteminde bulundu\u011fu idarenin, Yasada say\u0131lan kurumlardan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, b\u00fcnyesinde gizlilik \u00f6zelli\u011fi bulunan bir birim oldu\u011fundan da bahsedilemeyece\u011finden, davac\u0131n\u0131n atanma talebinde bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6rev gizlilik dereceli bir g\u00f6rev olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde, davac\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda yak\u0131nlar\u0131n\u0131n da g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131na dahil edilmesi suretiyle elde edilen istihbari bilgi notunda yer alan de\u011ferlendirmelere istinaden davac\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n olumsuz kabul edilerek s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna atanmas\u0131na dair ba\u015fvurusunun reddine ili\u015fkin dava konusu i\u015flemlerde hukuka uyarl\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
… <\/p>\n
\u00d6te yandan, dava konusu i\u015flemin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 sabit g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden davac\u0131n\u0131n bu i\u015flem nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n dava tarihinden itibaren yasal faiziyle birlikte tazmini gerekti\u011fi de a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. <\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, dava konusu i\u015flemlerin \u0130PTAL\u0130NE, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flem nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n dava tarihi olan 27.04.2018 tarihinden itibaren i\u015fletilecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131 idarelerden al\u0131narak davac\u0131ya verilmesine…”<\/p>\n
16. Daval\u0131 idare kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi, mahkeme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n dava konusu i\u015flemlerin iptaline ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak yap\u0131lan istinaf ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131 reddetmi\u015f; karar\u0131n davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ise kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Kald\u0131rma kararlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde, davan\u0131n konusu ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n s\u0131nav ba\u015fvurusunun kabul edilmemesine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fundan i\u015flemlerin iptali yolundaki mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n do\u011frudan s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7irilmesi sonucunu do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n bu a\u015famada u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 maddi bir kay\u0131p olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca her ne kadar ba\u015fvurucular dava dilek\u00e7elerinin sonu\u00e7 k\u0131sm\u0131nda i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin de iptalini ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zarar\u0131n tazminini talep etmi\u015fse de Mahkemece bu i\u015flemler ve bu i\u015fleme ba\u011fl\u0131 parasal hak talepleri hakk\u0131nda karar verilmedi\u011fi, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n da eksik h\u00fck\u00fcm nedeniyle istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. \u0130stinaf talebinde bulunan idareler aleyhine de bu taleple ilgili olarak B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesince, herhangi bir h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmamas\u0131 nedeniyle bu k\u0131sma ili\u015fkin istinaf incelemesi yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015fvurucular ve daval\u0131 idareler temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucular temyiz dilek\u00e7elerinde, dava dilek\u00e7esinde ifade ettikleri gibi s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7i\u015f i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan s\u0131nava kat\u0131lma ba\u015fvurular\u0131 ile i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemi ve bu i\u015flem nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 maddi zarar\u0131 dava konusu ettiklerini, Mahkemenin dava konusu i\u015flemleri bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirerek iptale ve tazminata h\u00fckmetti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
20. Dan\u0131\u015ftay Onikinci Dairesi, taraflar\u0131n temyiz taleplerinin reddine karar vermi\u015f; kararda, \u0130dare Mahkemesince i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma talebi hakk\u0131nda bir karar verilmedi\u011fini, \u0130dare Mahkemesince eksik h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fen bu k\u0131sm\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 temyiz talebinde bulunulmas\u0131n\u0131n ve esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinin hukuken m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Di\u011fer temyiz taleplerini ise temyiz incelemesine tabi tutulacak davalar aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
21. Dan\u0131\u015ftay kararlar\u0131 ba\u015fvuruculara 16\/6\/2020 ve 17\/6\/2020 tarihlerinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular 8\/7\/2020 ve 14\/7\/2020 tarihlerinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130LG\u0130L\u0130 HUKUK<\/p>\n
22. 375 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n ge\u00e7ici 23. maddesinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
”5018 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna ekli (I), (II), (III) ve (IV) say\u0131l\u0131 cetvellerde yer alan kamu idareleri (M\u0130T M\u00fcste\u015farl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hari\u00e7) ile bunlara ba\u011fl\u0131 d\u00f6ner sermayeli kurulu\u015flar, bu Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnameye ekli (I) say\u0131l\u0131 listede yer alan idarelerin merkez ve ta\u015fra te\u015fkilatlar\u0131nda; \u00f6demeleri merkezi y\u00f6netim, sosyal g\u00fcvenlik kurumu, fon, kefalet sand\u0131\u011f\u0131, yat\u0131r\u0131m izleme ve koordinasyon ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, gen\u00e7lik hizmetleri ve spor il m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc b\u00fct\u00e7elerinden veya d\u00f6ner sermaye b\u00fct\u00e7elerinden, an\u0131lan liste kapsam\u0131ndaki di\u011fer idareler i\u00e7in ise kendi b\u00fct\u00e7elerinden kar\u015f\u0131lanan 4734 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ve di\u011fer mevzuattaki h\u00fck\u00fcmler uyar\u0131nca personel \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na dayal\u0131 hizmet al\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri kapsam\u0131nda y\u00fckleniciler taraf\u0131ndan 4\/12\/2017 tarihi itibar\u0131yla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmakta olanlar;<\/p>\n
a) 657 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 48 inci maddesinin (A) bendinin (1), (4), (5), (6), (7) ve (8) numaral\u0131 alt bentlerinde belirtilen \u015fartlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mak,<\/p>\n
b) Herhangi bir sosyal g\u00fcvenlik kurumundan emeklilik, ya\u015fl\u0131l\u0131k veya malull\u00fck ayl\u0131\u011f\u0131 almaya hak kazanmam\u0131\u015f olmak,<\/p>\n
….<\/p>\n
kayd\u0131yla, bu f\u0131kran\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten itibaren on g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde idaresinin hizmet al\u0131m s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 birimine, s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrolar\u0131nda istihdam edilmek \u00fczere yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak ba\u015fvurabilirler. Ba\u015fvuranlar\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n tespiti, bu tespite itirazlar\u0131n karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131, \u015fartlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yanlar\u0131n idarelerince belirlenen usul ve esaslara g\u00f6re yap\u0131lacak yaz\u0131l\u0131 ve\/veya s\u00f6zl\u00fc ya da uygulamal\u0131 s\u0131nava al\u0131nmas\u0131, s\u0131nav sonu\u00e7lar\u0131na itirazlar\u0131n karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 ve s\u0131navda ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olanlar\u0131n kadroya ge\u00e7irilmesine ili\u015fkin s\u00fcre\u00e7 bu f\u0131kran\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten itibaren doksan g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde idarelerince sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r…”<\/p>\n
V. \u0130NCELEME VE GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
23. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 2\/10\/2024 tarihinde yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu toplant\u0131da ba\u015fvuru incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
A. Adli Yard\u0131m Talebi Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
24. Ba\u015fvurucu Mehmet \u00d6ks\u00fcz, bireysel ba\u015fvuru har\u00e7 ve masraflar\u0131n\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lama imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek adli yard\u0131m talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
25. Anayasa Mahkemesinin Mehmet \u015eerif Ay (B. No: 2012\/1181, 17\/9\/2013) karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkeler dikkate al\u0131narak ge\u00e7imini \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde g\u00fc\u00e7le\u015ftirmeksizin yarg\u0131lama giderlerini \u00f6deme g\u00fcc\u00fcnden yoksun oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmayan adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. \u0130ncelemenin Kapsam\u0131<\/p>\n
26. Ba\u015fvurucular, dava dilek\u00e7elerinde s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna al\u0131nmamalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemi dava konusu yapmalar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131nda dava konusu i\u015flemlerin yaz\u0131l\u0131 s\u0131nava girme talebinin reddedilmesi olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
27. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n 375 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK kapsam\u0131nda s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7mek i\u00e7in ba\u015fvuru yapt\u0131klar\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 375 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK, s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7i\u015f i\u00e7in gerekli \u015fartlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yanlar\u0131n idarelerce yap\u0131lacak yaz\u0131l\u0131 yahut s\u00f6zl\u00fc s\u0131nava girmelerini \u00f6ng\u00f6rmektedir. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n talepleri, ar\u015fiv kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle s\u0131nava girmeye hak kazanamad\u0131klar\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
28. Ba\u015fvurucular, a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 davalarda s\u0131nava girme taleplerinin reddine ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptalini de talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
29. Bu kapsamda ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosunda istihdam edilme taleplerinin s\u0131nava girmeye hak kazanamad\u0131klar\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle reddedilmesi \u00fczerine dava a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7irilme taleplerinin bunun \u00f6n \u015fart\u0131 olan s\u0131nava al\u0131nma talebinin reddi olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesinde ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n haklar\u0131n\u0131 ihlal eden bir y\u00f6n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
30. \u00d6te yandan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7elerinde bu iddialar\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ileri s\u00fcrmedikleri, aksine an\u0131lan dilek\u00e7elerde dava konusunu yaz\u0131l\u0131 s\u0131nava girme ba\u015fvurusunun reddedilmesi olarak ifade ettikleri g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131nda dava konusu i\u015flemlerin yaz\u0131l\u0131 s\u0131nava girme talebinin reddedilmesi olarak nitelendirilmesi nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
C. Karar Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u0130ddialar\u0131 ve Bakanl\u0131k G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc<\/p>\n
31. Ba\u015fvurucular; i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemi de dava konusu ettiklerini, \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131nda “dava konusu i\u015flemlerin iptaline” \u015feklinde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 nedeniyle i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma i\u015flemine ili\u015fkin olarak istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, an\u0131lan i\u015fleme dair temyiz ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131n ise karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle reddedildi\u011fini belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, ayr\u0131ca \u0130dare Mahkemesince verilen iptal karar\u0131 \u00fczerine s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosunda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015f olsalar da \u00f6ncesinde bir s\u00fcre i\u015fsiz kalmalar\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fclkiyet ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
32. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, ba\u015fvuruya ili\u015fkin s\u00fcre\u00e7 \u00f6zetlendikten sonra yap\u0131lacak incelemede Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n faydal\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmesine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ekinde yer verilen Mersin Valili\u011fi Hukuk \u0130\u015fleri \u015eube M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmayarak kendi hatalar\u0131yla usule ili\u015fkin yollar\u0131 t\u00fcketmedi\u011fi belirtildi\u011finden ba\u015fvurular\u0131n reddedilmesi gerekti\u011fi ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
33. Ba\u015fvurucu \u00d6znur \u0130vrendi Arasan Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne verdi\u011fi cevapta Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n davan\u0131n konusunu yanl\u0131\u015f de\u011ferlendirdi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek ba\u015fvuru formundakine benzer iddialarda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
34. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Herkes, me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollardan faydalanmak suretiyle yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcnde davac\u0131 veya daval\u0131 olarak iddia ve savunma ile adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131na sahiptir.”<\/p>\n
35. 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\u015fvurucular\u0131n yukar\u0131da yer verilen \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin \u00f6z\u00fc, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemi ve bu i\u015flem nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131klar\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131 dava konusu yapmalar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n an\u0131lan talepleri ile ilgili olarak olumlu ya da olumsuz bir karar verilmemesidir. Bu sebeple belirtilen ihlal iddialar\u0131, mahiyeti itibar\u0131yla karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
a. Kabul Edilebilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
36. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucular, idareye yapt\u0131klar\u0131 ba\u015fvurular\u0131n ve bu ba\u015fvurulara itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin i\u015flemler ile i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zarar\u0131n tazmini talepleriyle dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flem haricindeki i\u015flemler denetlenmi\u015f, iptal ve kabul kararlar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuruculardan bu kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmalar\u0131n\u0131n beklenip beklenemeyece\u011fi hususunun ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcketme y\u00f6n\u00fcnden a\u015fa\u011f\u0131da esasla birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
37. \u00d6te yandan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n ifadelerinden s\u00fcrekli kadroya ge\u00e7irildikleri anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bununla birlikte ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n mahkeme kararlar\u0131 \u00f6ncesindeki s\u00fcre\u00e7te i\u015fsiz kalmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015fleme ve bu i\u015flem nedeniyle talep ettikleri tazminata ili\u015fkin mahkemece bir h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u015fik\u00e2yet etmektedirler. Bu \u015fik\u00e2yet y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n ma\u011fdur stat\u00fclerinin ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011finden ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclmesinde ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n hukuki yarar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilmektedir.<\/p>\n
38. 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 karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
b. Esas Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
i. Genel \u0130lkeler<\/p>\n
39. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda herkesin yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131 \u00f6n\u00fcnde davac\u0131 veya daval\u0131 olarak iddiada bulunma, savunma ve adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3\/10\/2001 tarihli ve 4709 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131na “adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131” ibaresinin eklenmesine ili\u015fkin 14. maddesinin gerek\u00e7esinde “de\u011fi\u015fiklikle T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti\u2019nin taraf oldu\u011fu uluslararas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerce de g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olan adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131[n\u0131n] metne dahil” edildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde herkesin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu ibaresinin eklenmesinin amac\u0131n\u0131n Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi’nde (S\u00f6zle\u015fme) d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131 anayasal g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almak oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r (Ya\u015far \u00c7oban [GK], B. No: 2014\/6673, 25\/7\/2017, \u00a7 54). Bu itibarla Anayasa’da g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam ve i\u00e7eri\u011finin S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin “Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131” kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6. maddesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde belirlenmesi gerekir (Onurhan Solmaz, B. No: 2012\/1049, 26\/3\/2013, \u00a7 22).<\/p>\n
40. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise hi\u00e7bir mahkemenin g\u00f6rev ve yetkisi i\u00e7indeki davaya bakmaktan ka\u00e7\u0131namayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131, ki\u015filere davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc mahkemeden uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa ili\u015fkin bir karar verilmesini isteme g\u00fcvencesini de sa\u011flar (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. Filiz F\u0131rat, B. No: 2014\/10305, 5\/12\/2017, \u00a7 28).<\/p>\n
41. Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden biri olan mahkeme hakk\u0131; mahkemeye eri\u015fim, karar ve karar\u0131n icras\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7erir. Karar hakk\u0131 genel itibar\u0131yla mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcne getirilen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131 ifade eder. Bununla birlikte karar hakk\u0131 bireylerin sadece yarg\u0131lama sonucunda \u015fekl\u00ee anlamda bir karar elde etmelerini g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almaz. Bu hak ayn\u0131 zamanda dava konusu edilen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa ili\u015fkin esasl\u0131 taleplerin yarg\u0131 merciince bir sonuca ba\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 da gerektirir (Filiz F\u0131rat, \u00a7 29).<\/p>\n
ii. \u0130lkelerin Olaya Uygulanmas\u0131<\/p>\n
42. Ba\u015fvurucular, s\u00fcrekli i\u015f\u00e7i kadrosuna ge\u00e7i\u015f taleplerinin reddine ili\u015fkin i\u015flemler ile i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zararlar\u0131n tazmini talepleriyle dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz. \u00a713). Mahkeme ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na dair i\u015flemler ile bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zararlar\u0131n tazmini taleplerine ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme karar\u0131, kanun yolu incelemesinden ge\u00e7erek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
43. B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle talep ettikleri tazminat hakk\u0131nda karar verilmedi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f ancak ba\u015fvurucular eksik h\u00fck\u00fcm verilmesi nedeniyle istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bu k\u0131s\u0131m y\u00f6n\u00fcnden inceleme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n kararlar\u0131n bu k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131na ili\u015fkin temyiz talepleri de istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmad\u0131klar\u0131 i\u00e7in karar kesinle\u015fti\u011finden reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
44. Bu noktada m\u00fcdahalenin kayna\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin tespit yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesince dava konusu baz\u0131 hususlara ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 fark edilmi\u015f ancak ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n eksik h\u00fck\u00fcm gerek\u00e7esiyle istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilerek inceleme yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular, B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131yla dava dilek\u00e7esindeki taleplerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n bunun \u00fczerine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 temyiz ba\u015fvurusu, karar\u0131n bu k\u0131sm\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden istinaf kanun yoluna gitmediklerinden karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle reddedilmi\u015ftir. \u0130dare Mahkemesinin eksik h\u00fck\u00fcm kurmas\u0131 ve Dan\u0131\u015ftay\u0131n bu yorumu nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n taleplerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131 karara ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
45. \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm k\u0131sm\u0131nda yer verilen “A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, dava konusu i\u015flemlerin \u0130PTAL\u0130NE, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015flem nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n dava tarihi olan 27.04.2018 tarihinden itibaren i\u015fletilecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131 idarelerden al\u0131narak davac\u0131ya verilmesine…” ifadelerini ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n t\u00fcm taleplerinin kabul edildi\u011fi \u015feklinde anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
46. \u0130dare Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n konusu ve de\u011ferlendirilmesine ili\u015fkin k\u0131s\u0131mlar\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na dair i\u015flemlere yer verilmedi\u011fi, bu sebeple ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n dikkat ve \u00f6zen g\u00f6stererek davan\u0131n bu k\u0131sm\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 fark ettikten sonra istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Ancak dava konusu i\u015flemlerin birbiriyle ilgili oldu\u011fu, kararlarda dava konusu i\u015flemlerin iptali ve ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n dava konusu i\u015flemler nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131klar\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n tazmin edilmesi \u015feklinde h\u00fck\u00fcm kuruldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu sebeplerle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n yan\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fundan ba\u015fvuruculara istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurma sorumlulu\u011fu y\u00fcklenemeyece\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
47. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n davalar\u0131n\u0131n esas\u0131na ili\u015fkin taleplerinden olan i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmalar\u0131na dair i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle yoksun kald\u0131klar\u0131 parasal haklar\u0131n tazmini hakk\u0131nda olumlu veya olumsuz bir h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
48. Buna g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n taleplerinden birine ili\u015fkin olarak olumlu ya da olumsuz bir karar verilmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n yarg\u0131lama sonucunda karar elde etme hakk\u0131ndan yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
49. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VI. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
50. Ba\u015fvurucular, ihlalin tespit edilmesi ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131na h\u00fckmedilmesi ve 100.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
51. 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 (30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 50. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen bireysel ba\u015fvuruya \u00f6zg\u00fc yeniden yarg\u0131lama kurumunun \u00f6zelliklerine ili\u015fkin kapsaml\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar i\u00e7in 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
52. \u00d6te yandan ihlalin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n tazminat taleplerinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VII. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Ba\u015fvurucu Mehmet \u00d6ks\u00fcz’\u00fcn adli yard\u0131m talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. Karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\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 karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Mersin 1. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2018\/486, K.2018\/1189 ve E.2018\/489, K.2018\/1219) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 tutar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu \u00d6znur \u0130vrendi Arasan’a ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ise ba\u015fvuruculara M\u00dc\u015eTEREKEN \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n 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 2\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/22305 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 M. \u00d6. VE \u00d6. \u0130. A. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/22305) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 2\/10\/2024 R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 6\/3\/2025 – 32833 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR Raport\u00f6r : Muhammed Cemil KANDEM\u0130R Ba\u015fvurucular \u00a0 \u00a0 Vekili : Av. Ali BOZAN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, dava konusu edilen i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerin iptali ve bu i\u015flemler nedeniyle u\u011fran\u0131lan zarar\u0131n tazmini taleplerinin karara ba\u011flanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130 2. Ba\u015fvurular 8\/7\/2020 ve 14\/7\/2020 tarihlerinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Ba\u015fvurular, ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinin idari y\u00f6nden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n incelemesinden sonra Komisyona sunulmu\u015ftur. 4. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 5. B\u00f6l\u00fcm Ba\u015fkan\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin birlikte yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurulara konu yarg\u0131lama mercii kararlar\u0131n\u0131n ve ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n benzer olmas\u0131 nedeniyle 2020\/23423 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131n\u0131n 2020\/22305 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 ile birle\u015ftirilmesine ve incelemenin 2020\/22305 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. 6. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. 7. …<\/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-34863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n