Council Of The Enugu University Of Science & Technology & Anor V. E.N. Ude (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABUBAKAR JEGA ABDUL-KADIR, J.C.A.: (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Enugu State High Court of Justice sitting at Enugu, presided over by Hon. Justice F.K. Ezeike on 26th July, 2005.

The brief literature review of the instant case is that the Respondent as Plaintiff at the trial court instituted an action by ordinary Writ of Summons on 3/4/2002 against the Appellants for unlawful disengagement from the service of the 2nd Appellant. In his 17 paragraph Statement of Claim the Respondent claimed jointly and severally against the Appellants as follows:

“(a) A declaration that the Plaintiff’s retirement age while in the service of the defendants is 60 (sixty years)

(b) A declaration that the purported termination of the Plaintiff’s appointment by the defendants by a letter dated 1st February, 2001 Ref: ESUT/R/185 is unlawful and so null and void.

(c) An Order of reinstatement of the plaintiff into the service of the defendants and payment of all his accrued emoluments.

OR

An Order of payment to the plaintiff all his emolument entitlements up to the retirement age of 60 (sixty) years together with his gratuity and pension in accordance with the operative pension scheme in alternative to his reinstatement.”

Pleadings were settled at the trial court wherein trial was conducted in the Suit. The learned trial Judge in his considered decision gave judgment in favour of the Respondent and ordered as follows:

“(1) That without any amendment to the law, statute Ordinance or Regulation of Enugu State University of Science and Technology, the retirement age of the plaintiff, a Deputy Registrar on monthly take home pay of N82,000.00 per month is 60 (sixty) years

(2) That the letter dated February 2001 reference ESUT/R/85, which letter reorganizing the plaintiff out of his employment without more is unlawful and so null and void.

(3) That the plaintiff haven reached the retirement age of 60 years by December, 2004, cannot be reinstated into the University, rather the defendant should calculate and pay to the plaintiff all his outstanding arrears and allowances from February 2001 till the said attained age of 60 years in December,2004.

(4) That the defendant has no duty and or responsibility to pay to the plaintiff his pension and gratuity; such Order is refused and prayer for the defendants to pay same is dismissed.

(5) That the plaintiff should go to the appropriate authority for such entitlements.”