Media
- Home
- Details
Sokoto --His Lordship, Hon. Justice K. D. Damulak of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Sokoto Judicial Division on Wednesday 31st October 2018 in a judgment upheld the submission that SAIDU MADAWAKI (claimant) was lawfully dismissed or removed from his appointment as COMMANDANT, SOKOTO CORPS MARSHALS by the Governor of Sokoto State. The Court ordered Sokoto State Governor to pay claimant the sum of N500, 000.00 representing his salaries for the months of August and September, 2018 within 21 days.
The claimant prayed against the defendant among others; A DECLARATION that the 1st defendant has no power and or acted ultra vires his powers in purporting to dismiss the Claimant from his appointment as Commandant (Chief Marshal) of Sokoto Marshal Agency vide letter titled “Dismissal” reference No, EXC0/59/S/VOL/1 dated August 17, 2018. A DECLARATION that only the Board of the 2nd Defendant has Powers which it may exercise in the event of proven case of inefficiency or misconduct/gross misconduct and following due process to dismiss the Claimant from his appointment as Commandant (Chief Marshal) of Sokoto Marshal Agency· A DECLARATION that Claimant is entitled to retain /remain in his employment/appointment as Commandant (Chief Marshal) of Sokoto Marshal Agency until the said appointment is determined. AN ORDER setting aside the purported compulsory retirement of the Claimants conveyed/contained in the 1st defendant’s letter titled “Dismissal” dated August 17, 2018 reference nos. EXC0/S9/S.NOL/1, same being unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
The claimant was appointed as the COMMANDANT, SOKOTO CORPS MARSHALS by the Governor of Sokoto State on 12th November 2014. The Sokoto Marshall Agency Law was passed by the Sokoto State House of Assembly on 1st June 2016 and assented to by the Governor on 13/6/2016. On 15/8/2018, the claimant heard the press release announcing his dismissal by the 1ST defendant on Sokoto Rima Radio & Television. On 17/8/2018, the claimant was served with a dismissal letter, thus this suit of the claimant.
In his written address, learned claimant’s counsel submitted that, the person vested with power to appoint a person to the office of Commandant (Chief Marshal) of Sokoto Marshal Agency is the 1st defendant according to section 11(1) of the Sokoto Marshal Agency Law. However, the 1st defendant has no powers on his own to determine the appointment of the Claimant. That section 9(f) of the Sokoto Marshal Agency Law provides that the Board shall be responsible for retirement, promotion and discipline of staff for the Agency.
Learned claimant counsel submitted that the Sokoto Marshal Agency is an extra ministerial department or organ of the Sokoto State Government established under section 4(1) of the Sokoto Marshal Agency Law No. 5 of 2016 and is consequently part of the Public/Civil Service of the State.
Counsel submitted that being a staff or officer of the Agency, the claimant is in the public service of Sokoto State and subject to the Sokoto State Public Service Rules.
learned counsel submitted that all the reliefs sought by the Claimant before the Court flow naturally from the finding that what the defendants did in purporting to dismiss the Claimant is a nullity and of no effect hence they ought to be granted without any hesitation.
The learned Suleiman Usman SAN counsel to the defendants submitted that it is only when an employment is clothed with statutory flavor that it must be terminated in a way and manner prescribed by the relevant statute. That contrary to the claimant’s contention, his appointment is not made under any Act or Law and therefore do not enjoy statutory flavor.
That the appointment of claimant is a political appointment which he held at the pleasure of the Governor. He was for all intent and purposes, appointed as Commandant, Sokoto Corps Marshall with effect from 10th November 2014. He was not appointed by the STATE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SOKOTO STATE (2nd defendant) and therefore not a civil servant.
After reviewing the argument of both parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice K. D. Damulak expressed thus;
“The evidence that his appointment in 2014 as COMMANDANT, SOKOTO CORPS MARSHALS is equivalent of or was converted to Chief Marshall of Sokoto Marshall Agency after the Sokoto Marshall Agency Law was enacted in 2016 is missing.
“Similarly, there is nothing in the Sokoto Marshall Law 2016 to show that the position of commandant is the same as Chief Marshall therefore the Court cannot presume such fact that needs proof.
“I have carefully studied the 29 sections of that Law in search of the connectivity between the COMMANDANT, SOKOTO CORPS MARSHALS and the Chief Marshall, but I found none.
“I accordingly find that the claimant did not prove that his appointment as COMMANDANT, SOKOTO CORPS MARSHALS is the same position as Chief Marshall. I so hold.” Justice Damulak stated.
Furthermore, His Lordship declared the appointment of the claimant as a personal staff of the Governor since the Governor simply appointed him and assigned to him a position and duty as desired by the Governor and not by any Law.
The court also declared that the claimant remained in his appointment up to 27/9/2018, ordered defendants to pay to the claimant the sum of N500, 000.00 representing his salaries for the months of August and September 2018 within 21 days of this judgment failure upon which the judgment sum shall attract 10% interest per Annum.
