right to recall him to active service, as it actually did when hi s leave of absence ended on 18 July 1988. It follows, that in these circumstances, when the Responden t granted the Applicant a fixed-term and not a probationary ap pointment, it was a valid exercise of his discretion. It follows also, that as long as the Applicant was maintaining his ties with his University, it was proper for the Respondent t o grant him a fixed-term appointment. Moreover, Section II of PD/9/59 confirms this analysis when it states: "(a) Staff recruited fro m outside the Secretariat will normally be engaged as staff members on probationary appointments ...". The qualification by the wor d "normally" indicates that there is no commitment on the part of th e Organization to grant such appointments in all cases. XXVI.The Applicant invokes the benefit of Section IV, para. V, o f the General Assembly resolution 37/126 in which the Assembly decided that: "Staff members on fixed-term appointments upon completion o f five years of continuing good service shall be given ever y reasonable consideration for a career appointment." The Tribunal notes that the Under-Secretary-General fo r Administration and Management, in his letter to the Applicant date d 16 November 1988, almost a month before the completion of the fiv e- 20 - years of continuing good service, had already started the process of consideration of the Applicant for a career appointment. Such a process led to the granting to the Applicant of a probationar y appointment on 1 June 1989, following the severance of his ties with Tanta University. XXVII.The Applicant questioned the consistency of the Respondent' s established policy not to grant probationary appointments to staf f permanently employed by anothe r party, before severance of their ties