KOSRAE STATE COURT TRIAL DIVISION
Cite as Jackson v. Kosrae
10 FSM Intrm. 198 (Kos. S. Ct. Tr. 2001)
 
[10 FSM Intrm. 198]
 
KENYE G. JACKSON,
Plaintiff,
 
vs.
 
KOSRAE STATE and RENSLEY A. SIGRAH,
Defendant.
 
CIVIL ACTION 35-01
 
ORDER GRANTING PETITION;
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
 
Yosiwo P. George
Chief Justice
 
Decided: May 16, 2001
 
APPEARANCES:
 
For the Petitioner:                         Canney L. Palsis, Esq.
                                                        Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
                                                        P.O. Box 38
                                                        Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944
 
For the Respondents:                   April D.M. Skilling, Esq.
                                                        Acting Attorney General
                                                        Office of the Kosrae Attorney General
                                                        P.O. Box 870
                                                        Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944
 
* * * *
 
HEADNOTES
 
Mandamus and Prohibition
     The Kosrae State Court has the power to issue writs of mandamus but may only do so if the petitioner has met its burden to show that its rights to the writ is clear and undisputable. The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, the object of which is to require an official to carry out a clear, non-discretionary duty. Jackson v. Kosrae, 10 FSM Intrm. 198, 199 (Kos. S. Ct. Tr. 2001).
 
Mandamus and Prohibition; Public Officers and Employees) Kosrae
     When the Kosrae State Code Section 18.506 requires a branch head to make and transmit his final decision to the Director of Administration and the appellant within 14 days of receipt of the committee's recommendation and more than 14 days have elapsed since the branch head's receipt with no final decision by him, the branch head has failed to carry out his clear, non-discretionary duty to issue and transmit his final decision within the time period provided by law. The petitioner's right to the writ of mandamus is thus clear and undisputable and the writ will issue. Jackson v. Kosrae , 10 FSM Intrm. 198, 199 (Kos. S. Ct. Tr. 2001).
 
[10 FSM Intrm. 199]
 
* * * *
 
COURT'S OPINION
 
YOSIWO P. GEORGE, Chief Justice:
 
     On April 3, 2001, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the Respondent, Governor Sigrah of Kosrae State, to issue his decision pursuant to Kosrae State Code, Section 18.506. On May 2, 2001, Petitioner filed a Request for Entry of Default and Motion for Default Judgment. Defendant filed a Response to the Request for Entry of Default and Motion for Default Judgment on May 14, 2001. In his response, Defendant concedes that the proper action of this Court is to grant the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and order the Respondent to make and transmit his final decision in this matter.

     Based upon the information before this Court, the Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Request for Default, the Respondent's Response, the file in this matter and in the interests of justice, the Petitioner's Petition for a Writ of Mandamus is granted.

I. Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

     This Court has the power to issue writs of mandamus but may only do so if the petitioner has met its burden to show that its rights to the writ is clear and undisputable. Ting Hong Oceanic Enterprises v. Supreme Court, 8 FSM Intrm. 1 (App. 1997); Kos. S.C. § 6.101(a). The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, the object of which is to require an official to carry out a clear non-discretionary duty. Senda v. Trial Division, 6 FSM Intrm. 336 (App. 1994)

     Kosrae State Code, Title 18 sets forth the State Public Service System Act. Kosrae State Code, Section 18.506 requires a Branch Head to make and transmit his final decision to the Director of Administration and the Appellant within 14 days of receipt of the recommendation of the committee. In this case, the Appellant-Petitioner is an employee of the Executive Branch, subject to the decision of the Governor as Branch Head. The written Findings and Recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee were received by the Office of the Governor on November 14, 2000. No final decision by the Governor has been transmitted to the Appellant-Petitioner to date. More than 14 days has elapsed since the receipt of the committee's Findings and Recommendation by the Respondent Governor. Respondent has failed to carry out his clear non-discretionary duty to issue and transmit his final decision to the Appellant-Petitioner within the time period provided by law. The Petitioner's right to the writ of mandamus is clear and undisputable. Accordingly, the issuance of a writ of mandamus is proper.

II. WRIT OF MANDAMUS.

     This Writ of Mandamus is issued to Respondent Governor Rensley A. Sigrah. Respondent is ordered to make and transmit his final decision in this matter within seven (7) days of service of this Order and Writ of Mandamus. Respondent's final decision shall be transmitted to the Appellant-Petitioner in accordance with Kosrae State Code, Section 18.506.

* * * *

ľĆ˙˙˙1šž—ӗč—ý—˜'˜<˜Q˜f˜{˜˜Ľ˜ş˜Ϙä˜ů˜™`— u— Š— Ÿ— ´— ɗ ޗ ó— ˜ ˜ 2˜ O˜ ed˜ ˜ šÁH•P OĽ-ҨcZ‰ëľ˙˙1Y3™H™]™r™™Ž˜ Ø ؘ í˜ ™ ™ ,™ A™ V™ k™ €™ •™ Ş™ ż™ ԙ é™ ţ™