Auchi Polytechnic, Auchi V. Peter N. Okuoghae (2005)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

PATRICK IBE AMAIZU, J.C.A.

The plaintiff’s claim as set out in the writ of summons and pleadings is as follows:-

“(i) A declaration that the dismissal of the defendant with its letter dated 8th March, 1985 is contrary to section 26 of the Auchi Polytechnic Law and therefore unconstitutional, illegal, void and of no legal effect.

(ii) A declaration that the plaintiff is still under the employment of the defendant despite the said illegal dismissal and that he is entitled to be paid the emoluments of his office as the Assistant Chief Executive Officer (Accounts) of the defendant from the date of the purported dismissal.

(iii) An injunction to restrain the defendant its servants and or agents from preventing the plaintiff from performing any of the functions and duties of his office or interfering with the enjoyment of the rights, privileges and, benefits attached to his office. In the alternative, the plaintiff claims against the defendant the sum of N10,000.00, being damages from his, said wrongful dismissal.”

Briefly, the facts, which led to the above claims are as follows:-

The plaintiff is an Assistant Chief Executive Officer Accounts in the employment of the defendant. His duty schedule included the supervision of those charged with the responsibilities of paying various sums of money collected on the defendant’s behalf into the bank.

In the course of performing his duties, it was discovered that the sum of N36,795.00 (thirty six thousand, seven hundred and ninety five naira) was not paid into the bank by the staff in the defendants’ bursary who are under the plaintiff.

The defendant issued the plaintiff a query exhibit L. The query was answered by the plaintiff. On receipt of the answer to the query exhibit K, the plaintiff was interdicted. The defendant then set up an administrative panel to look into the allegation of dereliction of duty against him. The plaintiff was invited to appear before the panel. He gave an explanation of the part he played in the whole episode.

On the completion of its duty, the panel submitted its report to the defendant. Based on the report of the panel, the plaintiff was dismissed by the defendants’ board of governors by a letter signed by its secretary, one G. O. Otaru. In consequence, the plaintiff brought the suit claiming the above reliefs.

Pleadings were duly filed and exchanged by the parties. Each party amended its pleadings once. The trial proceeded on the amended pleadings. At the trial, the plaintiff gave evidence but called no witness. On the other hand, the registrar of the defendant gave evidence for the defendant. Thereafter, the case was adjourned for address. The learned trial Judge then considered the submissions of the learned counsel and the evidence of the two witnesses who testified. And in a reserved judgment held:-

“In the final analysis, upon a dispassionate consideration of the issue canvassed in the present case and the authorities and having regard to my proceeding remarks, the plaintiff’s case substantially succeeds and he is entitled to judgment and the reliefs sought in paragraph 17(ii), (iii), (iv) of his statement of claim are hereby granted. I assess the cost in this action at N1,000.00 (One thousand naira) in favour of the plaintiff”.

Dissatisfied with the above judgment of the lower court, the defendant, now the appellant appealed to this court on five grounds. Later, with leave of this court, which was granted on 1st June, 1988, they filed an additional ground of appeal. From the said six grounds, the appellants formulated the following three issues for determination-

(1) Whether or not the learned trial Judge was right in holding that the appointment of the plaintiff was not determined in accordance with section 26(1) & (2) of the Auchi Polytechnic Law, and, Chapter XXI, Clause 1(a), (b), (d) and 2 of exhibit E, i.e., the Handbook of Administrative Procedure merely because exhibit G was signed by the secretary to the Board?