[1] I have reached the conclusion that this application brought by the South African Municipal Workers’ Union has no merit. In furnishing my reasons for that conclusion, I will attempt to confine myself to what is essential, and to avoid becoming embroiled in peripheral issues and arguments which have emerged in the course of the applicant’s attempt to make of this case something which it is not.

[2] There are seven respondents. The principal ones are the first respondent, Ethekwini Municipality, and the fourth respondent, Ms N I Gxagxisa, an employee of the first respondent. The application concerns two claims.

[3] The main claim challenges the first respondent’s appointment of the fourth respondent to the post of Head : City Health in its municipal structure. The fourth respondent applied for the position in February 2009 and was appointed in May 2009. The applicant seeks an order reviewing and setting aside the appointment; an order directing the first respondent to re-advertise the post and to fill it in compliance with the provisions of a collective agreement entitled the “Employment Practice Policy Agreement”, which I shall refer to as “the collective agreement”; an order directing the first respondent to investigate whether any of its officials committed acts of misconduct in connection with the appointment of the fourth respondent; and finally an order directing the first respondent to deliver a report to this court within three months reflecting the product of that investigation.