Back

The court has exclusive jurisdiction in civil causes and matters relating to or connected with any labour, employment, trade unions, industrial relations and matters arising from workplace, the conditions of service, including health, safety, welfare of labour, employee, worker and matter incidental thereto or connected therewith.

LIVE Proceeding VIRTUAL COURT

News


Industrial Court Voids Compulsory Retirement Of Ex-Bursar Florence Fapohunda, Orders Ekiti State University To Pay Salaries, Gratuity, Pension Within 30 Days


1152 Friday 16th February 2018

 

 

Akure –The Presiding Judge of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Akure Judicial division, His Lordship, Hon. Justice O. O. Oyewumi on Wednesday 16th January 2019 in a judgment set aside letter of compulsory retirement of MRS FLORENCE MODUPE FAPOHUNDA (claimant) on the 28th of March, 2014 as unlawful and void,  declared that claimant is entitled as damages to all her salaries from the period she was unlawfully retired to 2018 when she would have lawfully retired, ordered Ekiti State University (defendant) to pay claimant gratuity and pension within 30 days.

 

The claimant sought against defendants among others; A Declaration that the claimant's compulsory retirement by the defendants on 1st April 2014 vide the defendants' letter dated 28th March 2014 is illegal, unlawful and ultra vires the defendant. An Order setting aside the defendants' letter of retirement dated 28th March 2014 for being unlawful, illegal and ultra vires.

Likewise, An Order reinstating the claimant into her employment as a staff of the defendants' University.

ALTERNATIVELY:

An Order directing the defendants to pay to the claimant all her pension, gratuity and other retirement benefits from the time she joined the public service till her date of retirement calculated and An Order directing the defendants to pay to the claimant the sum of N48,884,852.07 (Forty-Eight Million, Eight Hundred and Eighty-Four Thousand, Eight Hundred and Fifty-Two Naira and Seven kobo) being salaries accruable to the claimant from 1st April 2014 to 30th of September, 2021.

 

The claimant was appointed as the Bursar of the defendant vide a letter of 30th March 2001  and left office after 10 years and while awaiting direction in respect of her new posting, she received an internal memo dated 18th August 2011 of a claim by UBA Plc that Call with a sum ofN157,375,000 does not exist.

 

She stated that the existence of Call deposit accounts of the defendants were confirmed by the bank by a letter of 18th March 2011 addressed to the institution and that the bank paid accumulated interest on the call deposits for the year ended December 2010 by a covering letter dated 18th April 2011.

 

That her enquiries revealed that the bank official fraudulently opened a current Account in the name of the institution forging her and the Vice Chancellor's signatures.  She responded to Police invitation at Ado Ekiti and was charged before Magistrates Court and Ado-Ekiti High Court for same offences, the charges which were struck out by both Courts.

 

She learnt that UBA refunded N131, 000,000.00 fraudulently converted by it to the defendant with accrued interest. That while awaiting a response to her letter of demand for payment of all benefits due to her as a former Bursar, she was asked by the defendants to proceed on retirement from 1st April 2014 with 3 months salary in lieu of notice.

 

The defendants averred that the bank transaction leading to call of Account was made by the claimant during her tenure as Bursar and that the suspension of the claimant was requested for by the Commissioner of Police of Ado-Ekiti. They continued that the cases before the Magistrates and High Court were struck out not because she was not connected with the fraud but of the intervention of the defendants that the filing of charges against her was the discretion of the Police. They also averred that the request for payment of claimant's benefits was refused that the claimant was queried for embarking on a Ph. D program which the defendants did not approve for her. That she was asked to proceed on terminal leave when her answer to the said query was not satisfied.

 

That the retirement of the claimant was not a culmination of the various acts of the defendants to humiliate her but her insubordination and willful disobedience to constituted authority, that sabbatical was approved for her in 2007 but she refused to go and that the schedule of her new duty cannot be accommodated in the year 2012.

 

The claimant's argued that her appointment is statutory as such, she is invested with a higher status and legal protection much more than the ordinary one of master and servant, therefore, the provision of the statute must be complied with strictly in determining her appointment.

 

After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice O. O. Oyewumi expressed thus;

 

I need to state here that the defendants must of necessity comply with the provision of statutes and the letter of employment of the claimant regulating her employment before they could compulsorily retire the claimant.

 

“She was neither issued a query nor given any opportunity whatsoever to defend herself on the allegation of insubordination, arrogance and willful disobedience to constituted authority as alleged by the defendants in their pleadings, there is nothing on record equally evincing that there was a joint committee constituted by the defendants for the purpose of investigating and considering the claimant’s case.

 

“This to me is a serious breach of the contract, defendants obviously failed to follow the procedure listed in the University law in determining its relationship with the claimant.

 

“It would be a travesty of justice to overlook such a violation of the right of an employee to be heard before determining her employment on an allegation of misconduct.

 

“The appointment of the claimant cannot be determined other than in the way prescribed by the law, and any manner of termination that is inconsistent with the provision of the statute or conditions of appointment is null and void.

 

“It is consequent upon the total haughtiness of the defendants, that I find claimant’s compulsory retirement unlawful and in that regards, the letter of compulsory retirement dated 28th of March, 2014 and with effect from 1st of April, 2014 is null, void and of no effect whatsoever and hence set aside. I so find and hold.

 

In summary, the court declared that claimant is entitled as damages to all her salaries from the period she was unlawfully retired to 2018 when she would have lawfully retired, ordered defendant to pay claimant the sum of N18,060,489.00 (Eighteen Million and Sixty Thousand Four Hundred and Eight Nine Naira) as her gratuity and also the sum of N543,165.03 (Five Hundred and Forty-Three Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty Five Naira and Three kobo) pension within 30 days.

For Full Judgment, Click Here