The Supreme Administrative Court yesterday referred back to the Central Administrative Court a case on the legality of the Thaksin administration filed last week by two lawyers representing the Law Society of Thailand, citing technicalities.

The plaintiffs had asked the court to launch a judicial review of the legality of caretaker Premier Thaksin Shinawatra and his caretaker government. They also sought to have Thaksin or the government suspended from office.

However, presiding Judge Damri Watnasingha said yesterday that the nature of the case put it under the jurisdiction of the lower court. The Central Administrative Court, he said, should decide whether to accept the petition. According to the court's regulations, only certain cases can be filed directly to the Supreme Administrative Court.

The petition contends that Thaksin took an unlawful leave of absence from April 5. It calls for him to reimburse his pay and benefits to state coffers. It also asks for the nullification of all government decisions made over the past six weeks.

With Thaksin resuming work on Tuesday, another administrative case was filed against him, arguing that he had no mandate to return because his political break was tantamount to leaving office.

A court official said the other litigation relating to Thaksin's job status might commence at the Central Administrative Court instead of the higher court.

The Central Administrative Court has accepted a petition filed by Senator Karun Saingam and the People's Network for Elections seeking a judicial review of whether Thaksin's absence from work was lawful.

Meanwhile, former Senate candidate Dr Orawan Methadilokkul yesterday filed a separate petition with the Central Administrative Court against Thaksin and the Cabinet. She contended that the appointment of Deputy Prime Minister Chidchai Vanasatidya as caretaker prime minister was unlawful and that Thaksin's leave notice contained false information.

The plaintiff asked the court to rule on whether those breaches of law could result in Thaksin's departure from office and whether he had to return the salary he received during his absence from work.

In regard to Thaksin reporting back to work, former charter writer Kanin Boonsuwan said he saw Thaksin's political break as a departure from office.

Even though Thaksin tried to portray his break as a leave of absence sanctioned by the Government Administration Act, Kanin said it fell under Article 215 of the Constitution because he relinquished his caretaker duties.

Thaksin announced his decision to take indefinite leave until a new government came to power, he said. The Act sanctioned specific types of absence from office but not the relinquishing of duties for an unspecified period of time.

He said the caretaker prime minister had already left office and had no mandate to leave the caretaker government under his deputy Chidchai Vanasatidya.

He said ongoing administrative litigation would settle the legality of the caretaker government under Chidchai, while Thaksin's job status might have to be reviewed by the Constitution Court.