Media
- Home
- Details
Compulsory Retirement: Industrial Court Dismisses Application for Lacking Merit
His Lordship, Hon. Justice Sanusi Kado of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Abuja Judicial Division on Thursday 19th April in a ruling dismissed application raised by the defendant/applicant in the case of Col. Mohammed Auwal Suleiman (RTD) V. Nigerian Army & 8 ors for lacking merit.
The Claimant Col. Mohammed Auwal Suleiman (RTD) took out a complaint on 6th day of September 2016, accompanied with statement of facts, documents to be relied on at the trial, witness statement on oath, verifying affidavit, list of documents and list of witnesses.
Upon being served with the complaint and its accompanying documents the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th and 9thDefendants/Applicants 9hereinafter referred to as the Applicants) vide a motion on notice dated 20th day of December 2016, prays for an order of this Court dismissing this suit for being incompetent and for other order (s) as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.
In the affidavit in support of the motion on notice, it was averred that the Claimant was compulsorily retired from the service of the Nigerian Army vide letter dated 9th day of June 2016. It was also averred that vide a letter dated 23rd day of June 2016, the Claimant/Respondent wrote to the president, Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces seeking for a redress against his retirement. The letter of complaint was channelled through the Chief of Defence Staff who vide a dated 8th day of August 2016, acknowledged Claimants/Respondent’s complaint and stated that the complaint is receiving due attention. It was also stated that the Claimant/Respondent filed this action without following and exhausting administrative remedies or channel of resolution or ventilation of his grievance against the Applicants.
It is the submission of Counsel that since the Claimant/Applicant did not satisfy the requirement of the law in first exhausting the internal mechanism for the resolution of his grievances, this suit is incompetent and this Court lacks jurisdiction to try it.
In opposing this application the Claimant filed a 17 paragraphs affidavit on 13/2/2017, wherein it was averred that the letter of retirement of 9th June 2016, indicated that the Claimant was retired based on Disciplinary grounds i.e serious offences pursuant to paragraph 09.02 of the Harmonized Terms and Conditions of Service (2012) Revised. That vide letter dated 23/6/16 attached as exhibit ‘A’ the Claimant/Respondent wrote to the President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces for redress in line with paragraph 09.02 of the Harmonized Terms & Conditions of Service (2012) Revised.
It was stated that upon expiration of 30days after writing, the Claimant was left with no option than to seek redress in this Court. It was averred in the counter-affidavit that the Claimant has exhausted all channels and avenues for resolution of his grievance by complaining to the President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
In concluding his submission, Counsel submitted that having exhausted all remedies available in regards to Military law, this Court is vested with Jurisdiction to hear and determine this case. Counsel urged the Court to discountenance and dismiss the Applicants’ application with punitive cost.
After reviewing the argument of the parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice Sanusi Kado expressed thus;
“I have carefully and painstakingly perused the content of the originating process and its accompanying documents, as well as the motion on notice under consideration with its supporting affidavit, further and better affidavit and the written address of the Applicants. I have equally thoroughly examined the content of the counter-affidavit filed by the Claimant/Respondent and the written address filed along with the counter-affidavit.
Applying the principle of law enunciated in the quoted Court of Appeal case to the facts of this case, I hold that the letter of 23rd day of June 2016, written by the Claimant to the President, Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces seeking for redress regarding his compulsory retirement vide letter dated 9th day of June 2016, has substantially complied with condition precedent set out in section 178 of the Armed Forces Act and paragraph 09.02 of the Harmonized Terms of Conditions of Service (2012) Revised.
In the circumstances he cannot be denied access to this Court for redress based on alleged non fulfilment of condition precedent.
In view of the foregoing, this application fails and is hereby dismissed for lacking in merit.
For Full Ruling, Click Here...
