E. A. Utomudo V. Military Governor Of Bendel State & Ors (2014)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MARY UKAEGO PETER-ODILI, J.S.C.

The Plaintiff now Appellant instituted Suit No. B/347/87 in the High Court of Justice, Benin City in the former Bendel State, now Edo State against the Defendants now Respondents. The learned trial judge, Oni-Okpaku J (as she then was) dismissed the suit holding a lack of jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal or Court below for short which in turn dismissed the appeal upholding the decision of the trial High Court. The Appellant, dissatisfied has come before the Supreme Court on appeal.

BACKGROUND FACTS:

The facts are, in my humble view best exposed by recourse to the Statement of Claim of the Appellant which I shall restate hereunder, viz:-

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

1) The Plaintiff is a Nigerian, a senior Technical Officer (Mechanical) functioning as a Vehicle Inspection Officer, Ministry of Works Iruekpen until on or about the 6th of July, 1984 when he was purportedly dismissed by the 1st Defendant for doing no wrong.

2) The 1st Defendant is the Head of the Military Governor of Bendel State. The 2nd defendant is the officer of the government of Bendel State who represents the government in actions in Court. The 3rd defendant is the arm of the government of Bendel State responsible for the employment, promotion and discipline of public officers working for the government of Bendel State.

3) The Plaintiff avers that in the month of December, 1976, he was employed into public service of Bendel State as a Technical Officer (Mechanical). At the hearing of this action the plaintiff will rely and found upon the letter of employment. The plaintiff will also rely on a letter dated the 11th of July, 1977 by which the public service commission offered the plaintiff a probationary Appointment to the post of a Technical officer (Mechanical).

4) The Plaintiff avers that on or about the 12th of January, 1981, his appointment was confirmed by a letter from the Establishment Division of the Ministry of Work. At the hearing of this action, the plaintiff will rely and found upon the said letter.

5) On the 23rd of March, 1981, the plaintiff was promoted to the position of a Higher Technical Officer Ministry of Works and Transport. At the hearing of the action, the plaintiff will rely and found upon the letter of promotion dated the 23rd March, 1981. The plaintiff was later promoted a Senior Technical Officer (Mechanical) Ministry of “Works of Bendel State”.

6) The Plaintiff avers that as in June, 1984, he was a Senior Technical Officer Mechanical serving as a V.I.O. at the Ministry of Works and Transport Iruekpen.

7) The Plaintiff avers that on or about the 19th of June, 1984, some Police Officers came to meet him the plaintiff in his office at Iruekpen and told the plaintiff that they were investigating a case of forgery of a Road Worthiness Certificate No. 58546. The plaintiff on seeing the said certificate told the Police that the certificate was not forged and it was issued by him to the plaintiff on the 12th of June, 1984 in respect of vehicle No.BD 1533 BF which the plaintiff had earlier before inspected and passed for the certificate.

8) The Plaintiff avers that on the 25th of June, 1984, he and two others were charged to the Chief Magistrate Court Ekpoma for forgery of Road Worthiness Certificate No. 58546, conspiracy and stealing in charge No. MEK/207C/84. The Chief Magistrate after hearing evidence dismissed the charge and discharged and acquitted the plaintiff. At the hearing of this case, plaintiff will rely and found upon the ruling of the Chief Magistrates dated 30/10/84 to prove the fact of trial and acquittal.

9) The Plaintiff avers that about 3 days after the case, i.e Charge MEK/207C/84 had been charged to Court and it was still pending, the plaintiff was surprised to receive a letter dated the 6th of July, 1984 in which the plaintiff was purportedly dismissed from the service of Bendel State Government. At the hearing of this case, the Plaintiff will rely and found upon the said letter and all the other documents thereto attached.