Search a Keyword!

Search our legal repository for any term from articles, statutes to cases

Alhaji Sani Abubakar Danladi V. Taraba State House Of Assembly & Ors (2014) LLJR-SC

Alhaji Sani Abubakar Danladi V. Taraba State House Of Assembly & Ors (2014)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, J.S.C.

This appeal emanated from the proceedings of a panel set up by the Acting Chief Judge of Taraba State at the instance of the 1st Respondent to investigate allegation of gross misconduct against the appellant. Based on the report of the panel, the 1st Respondent removed the appellant from office as the Deputy Governor of Taraba State.

Appellant challenged his impeachment and removal from office in the High Court of Taraba State. The trial Court ruled against him.

He appealed to the Court of Appeal which court dismissed the appeal.

Appellant then further appealed to this court seeking the following reliefs:

“a. Allow the appeal.

b. Set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Yola Judicial Division in its entirety delivered on 19th July, 2013 which affirmed the judgment of the trial Court.

c. Set aside the judgment of the trial Court dismissing the appellant’s Originating Summons.

d. Nullify the impeachment proceedings and the impeachment (removal) of the appellant as the Deputy Governor of Taraba State.

e. An order re-instating the Appellant as the Deputy Governor of Taraba State.”

Appellant herein is also the appellant in Appeal No. SC.416/2013 in which he sought substantially similar reliefs against the 7 Member Panel which investigated the allegation made by the 1st Respondent against him.

There is no live issue in the appeal, the reliefs sought have been dealt with in Appeal No. SC.416/2013. It is my view that issues in this appeal have become academic in view of the judgment in SC.416/2013.

See also  Mr. Taiwo Ilari Ogun Vs Mr. Moliki Akinyemi & Ors (2004) LLJR-SC

The proper order in the circumstance is one for striking out and I do hereby strike out the appeal.

Parties to bear their respective costs.


SC.418/2013

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *