Sulaiman Shittu, CSC Docket No. 2026-635

BackgroundSulaiman Shittu appeals the removal of his name from the eligible list for Fiscal Analyst (M0527D), City of Newark, on the basis that he failed to respond to the certification notice.

The appellant, a non-veteran, took and passed the open competitive examination for Fiscal Analyst (M0527D), City of Newark, which had a closing date of May 23, 2022. The resulting eligible list promulgated on July 21, 2022 and expired on July 20, 2025. The appellant’s name was certified to the appointing authority on July 25, 2022, with a notice date of August 1, 2022. In disposing of the certification, the appointing authority requested the removal of the appellant’s name on the basis that he failed to respond to the certification notice.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant submits a sworn, notarized statement that he sent a letter to the appointing authority on August 2, 2022 in response to the certification notice.

BackgroundDespite an opportunity to do so, the appointing authority did not submit a response.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.7(a)6 provides that an eligible’s name may be removed from a list for “non-compliance with the instructions listed on the notice of certification.” N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3(b), in conjunction with N.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.7(d), provides that the appellant has the burden of proof to show by a preponderance of the evidence that an appointing authority’s decision to remove his name from an eligible list was in error. N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) provides that a rule may be relaxed for good cause shown in a particular situation. Additionally, N.J.S.A. 11A:4-6 and N.J.A.C. 4A:4- 3.4 provide that an eligible list may be revived in order to implement a court order or decision of the Civil Service Commission in the event of a successful appeal instituted during the life of a list, to correct an administrative error, or for other good cause.

AnalysisIn the instant matter, the appellant claims that he responded to the notice of certification in the required timeframe. In this regard, the appellant has submitted a sworn, notarized statement, attesting to the fact that he timely responded to the certification notice. While there is a presumption that mail correctly addressed, stamped and mailed was received by the party to whom it was addressed, the appellant has rebutted that presumption in submitting his sworn, notarized statement. See SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. State Department of Human Services, 146 N.J. 614 (1996); Szczesny v. Vasquez, 71 N.J. Super. 347, 354 (App. Div. 1962); In the Matter of Joseph Bahun, Docket No. A-1132-00T5F (App. Div. May 21, 2001). Thus, it is appropriate that the appellant’s name be restored to the subject eligible list for prospective employment opportunities only. Additionally, based on the foregoing, ample cause exists to revive the (M0527D) eligible list.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted and the eligible list for Fiscal Analyst (M0527D), City of Newark, be revived in order for the appellant to be considered for appointment at the time of the next certification for prospective employment opportunities only.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.