Media
- Home
- Details
Abuja –His Lordship, Hon. Justice Z. M. Bashir of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Sitting in Abuja on Monday 23rd February 2019, dismissed suit filed by ADETORO RASHIDATU FOLASADE & 431 Ors Suing for themselves and as representatives of members of staff disengaged by reason of the Civil Service Reforms against FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC BIDA and 5 others for lacking merit. The court held that claimants failed to present cogent, credible and convincing evidence to support claims.
The Claimants sought against defendants among others; A DECLARATION that the Claimants are entitled to received payments under the Consolidated Tertiary Institutions Salary Structure (CONTISS) issued by the National Salaries, Income and Wages Commission (3rd Defendant).
Likewise, A DECLARATION that the payments made by the 5th Defendant in January 2009 through cheques and in April 2013 through e-payments to the Claimants are insufficient to offset the Claimants’ entitled severance benefits under the Consolidated Tertiary Institutions Salary Structure (CONTISS) issued by the National Salaries, Income and Wages Commission (3rd Defendant).
The case of the Claimants is that they were staff of the Federal Polytechnic, Bida, Niger State (1st Defendant), and were disengaged and retired in 2007, by reason of the Civil Service Reforms, a policy of the Federal Government of Nigeria.
In view of the severance of service, NATIONAL SALARIES, INCOMES AND WAGES COMMISSION- 3rd Defendant was mandated by the then President to develop a salary structure (CONTISS), and as a departure from the old salary structure, called the Harmonized Tertiary Institutions Salary Structure (HATISS), which salary structure was to take effect from January, 2007, and was to be the parameter to be used in computing the terminal benefits of the Federal Government employees affected by the said down-sizing by reason of the said Civil Service Reforms, including the Claimants.
In view of the monies received, the Claimant posits that the payment was not based on CONTISS as there was a shortfall in the amount paid and Efforts to get the 5th Defendant to pay have proved abortive, hence this suit.
Defendant stated that there was a reform by the Federal Government to downsize and subsequently letters of disengagement were issued to those who were affected effective from 31st December 2006. The salary structure as at that 31st December 2006 was the HATISS while the CONTISS came into operation on the 1st of January, 2007 after the Claimants were disengaged from service urged the court to strike out the Claimants’ case for lacking merit.
The 4th Defendant NATIONAL PENSION COMMISSION posited that the Claimants who were disengaged from service in April 2007 prior to the actual implementation of the Contributory Pension Scheme in July 2007 are not covered under the Scheme.
Counsel further posited that some of the Claimants are dead and submitted that the law is trite that where a party to a suit is dead, the action cannot be maintainable or continue by the dead person until the party is substituted.
He argued that the CONTISS salary structure only came into effect on the 1stof January 2007after the Claimants were disengaged on the 31st of December, 2006 urged the court to dismiss the Claimants’ claims against the 1st Defendant with substantial cost.
After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice Zaynab M. Bashir expressed thus;
“I must point out that the death of a party or parties affecting the subsistence of an on-going suit depends on the nature of the suit and whether the suit can survive the deceased.
“The wordings of the disengagement letter is very clear and explicit, to the effect that the retirement of the Claimant and all other colleague of his who were disengaged on the same date is to take effect on the 31st of December, 2006 and the effective date for the implementation of the new Consolidated Tertiary Institution Salary Structure is 1st January, 2007.
“There is no gainsaying that the new salary structure came into effect after the Claimants were disengaged from service and consequently, the Claimants cannot benefit from same, not even by implication unless the circular says so expressly.
“In the instant case, the Claimant has failed to present cogent, credible and convincing evidence in view of the evidence before this court and for that reason I have no hesitation in resolving the sole issue in favour of the Defendants to the effect that in view of the evidence before the court, the Claimants are not entitled to their claims.”
In the final analysis, the court dismissed the suit in its entirety for lacking merit.
