Alidu Adah V. National Youth Service Corps. (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

CHUKWUMA-ENEH, J.C.A 

In paragraph 16 of the statement of claim filed in this matter before the Makurdi High Court Benue State, the appellant (i.e. the plaintiff in the court below) claimed against the respondent (i.e. defendant in the court below) the following reliefs:

“(a) A declaration that the suspension of the plaintiff from office without pay vide the defendant’s letter Ref. No. NYSC/SC/STA/PER/28/Vol. 11/185 of 20/12/90 is null and void and of no effect as the said letter was given in breach of the Federal Civil Service Rules.

(b) A declaration that the termination of the appointment of the plaintiff by the defendant vide a letter Ref. No. NYSC/BNS/PER/3/54 of 28/6/91 is null and void and of no effect whatsoever, in that the procedure in the Federal Civil Service Rules was not followed.

(c) A declaration that the plaintiff is still in the employment of the defendant and that plaintiff is entitled to all his salary and allowances and or benefits including promotions from 20/12/90 when plaintiff was purportedly suspended from office without pay.

(d) An order reinstating plaintiff and for the payment of all the entitlements and allowances for the plaintiff including his salary.”

After the appellant’s oral evidence followed by a short address delivered by his counsel, the trial court in a considered judgment reached the following conclusion.

“Therefore where plaintiff has been queried and he has submitted his representations the defendant is at liberty to take any decision it deemed fit. In the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff cannot complain that he was not given an opportunity to be heard. He was heard in the allegations against him. His constitutional right to fair hearing was recognised and given. The defendant had the right to take a favourable or an unfavourable decision against him.

On the claim that he was terminated during the pendency of his criminal trial. I note that rule 04109 provides that if criminal proceedings are instituted against an officer, proceedings for his dismissal upon any grounds involved in the criminal charge shall not be taken pending the criminal proceedings. However, in this case the plaintiff has failed to tender the record of proceedings in the Magistrate Court to establish when the proceedings in that court terminated. I therefore invoke the provisions of Section 149(d) of the Evidence Act against the plaintiff for withholding that information as there is a presumption that if such proceeding was produced it could have been unfavourable to the plaintiffs.

I may say that as pathetic as the case of the plaintiff may appear to be, the court cannot substitute its own decision with that of the defendant. The duty of the court is to ensure that due process was followed in the disciplinary matter and no more.

For the foregoing reasons, I find that proper procedure was followed before the plaintiff was terminated. The case of the plaintiff is therefore dismissed.”

Utterly dissatisfied with the decision, the appellant has appealed to this court against thedecision and has itemised his grouse against the decision under 3 (three) grounds of appeal. And they are reproduced without their particulars as follows:

“(1) The decision is against the weight of evidence.

(2) The learned trial Judge misdirected himself in law when he held thus: