Media
- Home
- Details
Yenagoa --His Lordship, Hon. Justice B. A. Alkali of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, sitting in Yenagoa on Monday 15th October 2018 in a judgment declared that BEAUTY UMBU is an employee of the SOUTHERN IJAW LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCIL (3rd defendant). His Lordship declared that the Claimant is yet to attain the compulsory retirement age of sixty years as claimed by the 1st Defendant, ordered Defendants to reinstate the Claimant to her rightful position as a staff of Southern Ijaw Local Government Council.
The Claimant by a Complaint dated 14th December 2017 sought against the defendants among others; A DECLARATION that the Claimant is an employee of the 3rd Defendant. AN ORDER DIRECTING the Defendants to reinstate the Claimant to her right position as a staff of the 3rd Defendant. AN ORDER DIRECTING the 3rd Defendant to pay the Claimant her monthly salaries from the month of September 2017 till the date judgment is delivered wherein the sum of Thirty Three Thousand, Five Hundred Naira (N33, 500.00) only represents a month’s salary.
The defendant also counter-claimed against the claimant inter alia for A DECLARATION that the Claimant has attained the retirement age of 60 years as Claimant failed and/or neglected to furnish the Local Government Service Commission with her Birth Certificate or Age Declaration as at the time of her employment. A DECLARATION that the Claimant’s rise to Grade level 06 is fraudulent and questionable.
The Defendants in their written address dated and filed on the 29th day of June 2018 formulated for determination Whether the Claimant’s elevation to Grade Level 06 in her employment is proper in the absence of the requisite qualification. Whether the failure of the Claimant to provide her affidavit of declaration of age eleven (11) years after her appointment supports the fact that her age has been altered.
The Defendants contended that under cross-examination when the Claimant was asked about the educational documents she presented to the Junior Staff Promotion Board prompting her alleged promotion to Grade Level 06, she confirmed that she did not show them anything but she got promoted. That Claimant was given the notice to produce her First School Leaving Certificate but she has failed to do so. The Defendants are left with no other option than to conclude that the Claimant does not have the said First School Leaving Certificate.
On the Issue, whether or not from the evidence before the Court, the Claimant has attained sixty (60) years to be compulsorily retired by the Defendants, the Claimant avers that from the totality of evidence before this Court, the Claimant has not attained the compulsory retirement age of Sixty (60) years as such the Claimant was unlawfully retired from the employment of the 3rd Defendant
The Claimant refers the Court to the date of birth on the exhibits tendered. The Claimant then urged Court to hold that the Claimant is yet to attain the compulsory retirement age of sixty (60) years and grant all the reliefs of the Claimant.
The Claimant further averred that it is not by the appearance that the age of a person is determined as most persons appear younger while others appear older than their ages.
The Claimant’s averments in the Statement of Facts show that those conducting the immediate past verification exercise of staff under the employment of the 3rd Defendant looked at the Claimant’s face and said that the Claimant is older than sixty (60) years, hence the purported retirement.
The Claimant contended that the totality of both documentary and oral evidence shows that the Defendants did not verify their records properly before the purported retirement contrary to the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that governs retirement of civil servants in the country. The Claimant then urged this Court to so hold and grant all the reliefs of the Claimant as prayed.
The Claimant submits that the Defendants failed to prove how the Claimant reduced her age in this case, whether via oral evidence or documentary evidence. But the documents produced in court by the Defendants rather support the case of the Claimant.
On the Claimant’s assertion that the Defendants failed to prove how the Claimant reduced her age whether via oral or documentary evidence, the Defendants submit that by the provisions of the Public Service Rules on eligibility for employment, the Defendants have proved their case.
The Defendants finally urged this Court to discountenance the arguments in the Claimant’s Final Written Address and uphold that of the Defendants.
After reviewing the argument of both parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice B. A. Alkali expressed that the application for employment and which forms part of the documents tendered by the Defendants shows that the Claimant was born on the 4th May 1970, that the fact that some members of the verification committee adjudged the Claimant to be over sixty years of age, their decision cannot take the place of Exhibits CW1 002, this is because documentary evidence cannot be proved by oral evidence.
On the Second Issue raised by the Defendants that the Claimant was fraudulently promoted to Grade Level 06 without proper qualification, His Lordship described it an afterthought that in all the said exhibits the 3rd Defendant categorically stated that the Claimant was promoted based on her performance at the promotion interview which was conducted by the Junior Staff Management Committee of the and still went ahead and promoted the Claimant only to turn around now and cry foul.
“In view of the foregoing facts I enumerated ab initio I hold that the Claimant is an employee of the 3rd Defendant having not attained the compulsory retirement age of sixty years and as such I order the Defendants to re-instate the Claimant to her right position as a staff of the 3rd Defendant and also to pay the Claimant her monthly salaries from the Month of September 2017 up to date at Thirty Three Thousand Five Hundred Naira (N33,500.00) per month and also order that the Defendants shall not withhold her salary and entitlements unjustifiably.” Justice Alkali Ruled.
The court declared that all terms of this judgment are to be complied within 30 days.
