Media
- Home
- Details
Abuja –His Lordship, Hon. Justice Z. M. Bashir of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Abuja judicial division, on Monday 11th December 2018 in a judgment declared as malicious, unlawful and illegal the reduction of JOSEPHA. ALI (Claimant) monthly salary by NIGERIAN BUILDING & ROAD RESEARCH INSTITUTE, ordered payment of all outstanding balance of his salaries for the months of April to December 2011, excluding the two years period for which the Claimant took up contract appointment with the ECN within 60 days.
The suit was originally before the Hon. President, Hon. Justice B. A. Adejumo before being reassigned to this court sometime in October 2017. Upon the matter before this court, parties took adjournments in attempt to settle out of court but the attempts failed upon which parties proceeded to hearing.
Arising from the statement of fact, the Claimant claimed against the defendants among others; A Declaration that the decision of the 1st and 2nd Defendants to threaten and actually bar the Claimant from the premises of the 2nd Defendant and discontinue any subsequent involvement with the Claimant, is a breach of the Claimant’s Fundamental Right(s) to personal liberty, association and freedom of movement. A Declaration that the deliberate and unilateral suspension of the Claimants salaries and allowances by the Defendants in the circumstances of this case, without notice, reason and without affording the claimant an opportunity to be heard as to otherwise, is unlawful and a breach of his Fundamental Right(s) to Fair Hearing and Dignity of Human Person.
Likewise, A Declaration that the Claimant is still in the Public Service of the Federation as a Substantive Staff of the Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute (NBRRI) – (2ND Defendant), until his Compulsory retirement on 27th October, 2015, and is entitled to all the rights, privileges and benefits as a Public Servant in the Public Service of the Federation.
The Case for the Claimant is that he was a career public servant on permanent and pensionable status in the public service of the Federation, under the direct employment of the Defendants particularly the 2nd Defendant. His tenure as DG elapsed in 2006 but was renewed for another four years which ended in 2010. Upon the expiration, he applied for his deferred leave of 145 days and to proceed on sabbatical which was granted approval. The said approval required him to resume duties at the 2nd Defendant at the end of the sabbatical as Director, Engineering Materials Research Department (EMRD). Prior to the end of the tenure of the Claimant as DG, the Governing Board of the 2nd Defendant wrote the Claimant through the Chairman to clarify the Claimant’s status in the service of the 2nd Defendant upon the expiration of the Claimant’s tenure as D.G/C.E.O and the Governing Board restated that the Claimant is not retiring from service at the end of the Claimant’s tenure as DG/CEO of the 2nd Defendant but that the Claimant can remain to continue with research work with the 2nd Defendant, if the Claimant so wishes.
The Claimant also averred that in view of his compulsory retirement on 27th October 2015 upon attaining the age of 65, he wrote to the 1st Defendant notifying the Defendants of his retirement from service and requested for necessary documents to enable him process his pension but the same was not provided.
The Claimant stated that the act of the Defendants in suspending his salaries and Allowances from January 2012 till date has rendered him penniless.
The case for the Defendants is that the employment of the Claimant was governed by the Public Service Rules. That although the statement under the Conditions of Service for Federal Research Institutes, that any competent Research Officer made CEO is allowed to return to his/her position as Director of Research at the expiration of his/her tenure as Chief Executive Officer of the institute is generally true, but the Condition of Service so referred to was never approved and applied in any Federal Research Institute, College of Agriculture or such Allied Institute, much less to the Claimant.
The Defendants maintained that the Claimant was erroneously approved for proceeding on deferred leave and sabbatical leave having retired from the service of the 2nd Defendant in 2010. The Defendants added that the Claimant did not proceed on sabbatical as he was taken in for contract employment at Energy Commission of Nigeria which was not appropriate.
The Defendants denied liability for the claims of the Claimant and maintained that the Claimant has been paid all his entitlements after his retirement, and his pension has been ready for him, but he deliberately refused to access same therefore.
The Defendants, therefore, concluded that the Claimant is not entitled to any of his claims.
Upon cross-examination, Counsel submitted on behalf of the Defendants that the position of the Claimant that he retired in October 2015 when he turned 65 is not true and cannot be supported by the available evidence as same is not tenable in law and in fact.
In arguing issue one, counsel posited that all through the facts leading to this case, up until the close of trial, nothing was placed before this Honourable Court to show that the Claimant’s employment has ceased, therefore his employment subsists.
After careful analysis of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice Z. M. Bashir expressed thus;
“At the time this suit was instituted in September 2015, the Claimant holds the view that he has not retired but I suppose that view can no longer be sustained today even though there is no document before the court terminating the employment of the Claimant.
“In view of the foregoing, this court holds that the salaries to be paid to the Claimant shall exclude the two years period for which the Claimant took up contract appointment with the ECN, same having clearly not being the sabbatical for which the Claimant sought and for which he obtained approval.
“Consequently, issue two is resolved in favour of the Claimant to the effect that in view of the evidence before this court, the Claimant did not retire from the service of the 2nd Defendant upon the expiration of his tenure as Director-General/Chief Executive Officer on the 14th of July 2010 making him entitled to further payment of salaries less two years.
“In the instant case, the equity of the case also demands that the Claimants be paid all outstanding balance of his salaries for the months of April to December 2011 and also his salaries for the periods he was in employment of the Defendant up to the period of his compulsory retirement although less the period of two years of contract appointment with ECN.
And also the court awarded the sum of N200,000.00 to the Claimant against the Defendants for damages.
“In view of the foregoing, relief ‘r’ is granted to the effect that the reliefs granted and the orders made by this court, in this suit, in respect of monies to be paid, are to be complied with within 60 days of the delivery of this judgment after which they shall attract 10% interest per annum.” Justice Bashir Declared
