Media
- Home
- Details
Akure –His Lordship, Hon. Justice O. O. Oyewumi of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Akure judicial division, on Monday 3rd December 2018 in a judgment declared the purported letter of termination of IRINGE-KOKO CHARLES OLATUNDUN (claimant) issued by ONDO STATE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION (1st defendant) and as unlawful, null and void and thus set aside, ordered defendant to forthwith reinstate the Claimant back to its employment.
The claimant approached this Court by a General Form of Complaint filed on 27th day of November, 2017, sought against the defendants among others: A Declaration that the 1st and 4th defendants' letters of suspension and termination of appointment dated 14/09/2017 and 08/11/2017 respectively are irregular, inappropriate, unlawful, unfair, unjust and unconstitutional thereby rendering same null and void and of no effect whatsoever. A Declaration that the claimant still remains in the employment of the 1stdefendant and entitled to the unimpeded payments of her salaries, allowances, and entitlements enjoyed by other staff of the 1st defendant (of the claimant's status) in the employment of the 1st defendant.
Likewise, An Order directing the defendants to pay to the claimant forthwith all her arrears of salaries, allowances, and entitlements payable to her colleagues/contemporaries as at the date of judgment all of which the defendants have deprived the claimant by virtue of the purported termination of appointment.
It is the case of the claimant that she was offered employment by ONDO STATE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION (1stdefendant) as a Staff Attorney in 2015. She stated that she along with five others got converted to the position of a Magistrate on 30/3/2016 which was to be effective from 1/1/2016.
It is her contention that as a Staff Attorney, her grade level was Grade 12 step 2 as Senior Registrar 1 and on 29/3/2016 at the plenary of the 1st defendant as Senior Magistrate II, her Grade level was Grade level 13 and was on that level when her appointment was purportedly terminated.
She stated that prior to the time she started sitting as a Magistrate, she averred that her employment was confirmed and gazetted and that same is pensionable and of statutory flavour. She pleaded that by a letter dated 14/9/2017, she was allegedly suspended by the defendants for Lack of Due Process in her Appointment as a Magistrate.
That prior and after the receipt of her suspension letter, she was not issued with any query and not paid her salary for the month of September 2017, and that on 13/11/2017 she received the letter terminating her employment.
The defendants averred further that they observed irregular and indiscriminate appointment of the Magistrates and some Senior staff, then it suspended some Senior officers including the claimant to review their appointments.
They argued further that the claimant cannot preside and not qualified to preside as a sitting Magistrate over any matter in any Court of law as her appointment is irregular and that her purported appointment in a Gazette is a mere notice to the general public which does not translate to a regular or lawful appointment.
It is the further submission of learned counsel that having canvassed before the Court that, the 1st defendant reserves the statutory right to disengage the claimant who was yet to be confirmed as a permanent staff, he urged the Court to hold that the claimant is not entitled to reinstatement.
After careful analysis of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice O. O. Oyewumi okayed the suspension of the claimant that 1st defendant is constitutionally vested with the powers to discipline or make enquiry into the claimant employment and further expressed thus;
“There is nothing on record evincing so and the publication of her name in the official gazette is a mere notification to the general public of the names of its newly appointed staff at the period so published and should not be misinterpreted or deemed as confirmation of appointment of the claimant by the 1stdefendant.
“A keen perusal of Offer of Appointment to the Pensionable Establishment dated 23rdof November, 2015and the letter of Conversion dated 30th of March, 2016. It is plain that claimant’s conversion was effected at the plenary of the 1st defendant. The defendants failed to contradict the fact that the 1st defendant at its plenary of 29th March 2016 approved the conversion of the claimant to the post of Senior Magistrate.
“It is a trite position of the law that where there are different statutes regulating an employment, it must be read holistically together and not in part or in isolation so as not to render any provision or term superfluous, ambiguous or meaningless.
“There is nothing on record evincing the fact that she was invited by the defendants to make representations in defence of the allegation against her, rather her employment was terminated without compliance with the position of the law governing her employment.
“It is in consequence of all stated above in this judgment that I find and hold that the claimant’s letter of termination dated 8th of November, 2017 is unlawful, null and void and thus set aside. " His Lordship ruled.
The court ordered the Defendant to forthwith reinstate the Claimant back to its employment, and be paid all her arrears of salaries, allowances, and entitlements payable to her colleagues/contemporaries as at the date of judgment.
