Reappointment to duty of a resigned public official

Public service refers to the activities carried out directly or indirectly by public institutions in a regular and continuous manner to serve the public interest. A public official is a person who takes part in the execution of public service and constitutes the human element among the administrative tools of the state. Public officials are examined under two categories: in a broad and narrow sense. In administrative law, a public official is defined as a person who performs public service as a profession and maintains a statutory public law relationship with the administration. The phrase "civil servants and other public officials" in Article 128 of the Constitution includes not only civil servants subject to Law No. 657 but also other occupational groups such as contracted personnel, academic staff, judges and prosecutors, and members of the Turkish Armed Forces who are subject to special regulations. A public official has the right to join or leave public service of their own free will. In this context, resignation—one of the ways to terminate public service—is a discretionary right that allows the public official to voluntarily end their duties and has the nature of a personal and constitutive legal act. To ensure the uninterrupted and orderly continuation of public service, certain limitations have been imposed on the exercise of this right and on reappointment following resignation. In such cases, the administration holds discretionary power in accepting or rejecting requests to return to duty. However, this discretion is not unlimited; it cannot be used arbitrarily and must serve the public interest. It is also subject to judicial review. In practice, return-to-duty requests by resigned public officials are often rejected, and such rejections are generally upheld by the courts. This leads to a de facto restriction of the right to resign. For effective implementation, sufficient staffing opportunities should be provided to public institutions, administrative justifications should be reviewed more rigorously, and inconsistencies between legislation and practice must be resolved.