THIRD SECTION

Application no. 24684/11 Rashid MELIKSETYAN against Armenia lodged on 11 April 2011

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Rashid Meliksetyan , is an Armenian national who was born in 1951 and lives in Yerevan. He is represented before the Court by Ms Grigoryan , a lawyer practising in Yerevan .

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is a former employee of a State Revenue Committee (hereinafter “the Committee”).

By an order of the Head of the Committee of 23 February 2009 the applicant was dismissed from his job.

On an unspecified date the applicant brought an action against the Committee seeking annulment of the order of 23 February 2009. He also demanded reinstatement in his job and payment for forced absence.

On 9 June 2009 the Administrative Court decided to declare void the order of 23 February 2009 and awarded the applicant compensation for lost earnings starting from 23 February 2009 until the date on which the judgment became final. By the same judgment the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant ’ s reinstatement claim.

On an unspecified date the applicant lodged an appeal challenging the judgment of the Administrative Court in the part of the reinstatement claim.

On 23 March 2010 the Administrative Court granted the applicant ’ s claim and ordered the applicant ’ s reinstate ment in his previous position.

The Committee lodged an appeal on points of law against the decision of 23 March 2010.

On 19 May 2010 the Court of Cassation decided to return the appeal so the judgment of 23 March 2010 became final.

On 17 June 2010 the Administrative Court issued a writ of execution of its judgment of 23 March 2010.

On 25 June 2010 the bailiff instituted enforcement proceedings. On the same date he decided to oblige the Committee to comply with the requirements of the writ within two weeks.

On 4 August 2010 the bailiff took a new decision to oblige the Committee to comply with the requirements of the writ within two weeks.

Between August and October 2010 the applicant addressed several letters to the Committee, to different officials complaining that no measures had been taken to enforce the final judgment of 23 March 2010 and requesting that the Committee be compelled to comply with that judgment.

In reply to the applicant ’ s requests, the bailiff and the Committee replied that the enforcement of the judgment of 23 March 2010 was impossible. They stated, in particular, that the applicant could not be reinstated because his previous position was no longer vacant .

B. Relevant domestic law

1. Code of Civil Procedure

According to Section 14, a judicial act which has come into effect is mandatory for all state bodies, local self-government bodies, their officials, legal entities and citizens and is subject to execution throughout the territory of the Republic of Armenia.

2. Law on compulsory enforcement of judicial acts

According to Section 71, decisions taken by compulsory enforcement officers within the scope of their competences shall be binding on all state bodies, local self-government bodies, officials, organisations and citizens and shall be subject to execution throughout the territory of the Republic of Armenia.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the Administrative Court ’ s judgment in his favour was not enforced .

QUESTION s TO THE PARTIES

Was the Administrative Court ’ s judgment of 23 March 2010 fully enforced? If not, was the non-enforcement of the judgment in the applicant ’ s favour compatible with his rights guaranteed by Article 6 of the Convention?