Federal University Of Technology, Minna & Ors V. Dr. (Mrs) Adaeze G.N.C. Okoli (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA. J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is from the decision of the Federal High Court, sitting at Minna in Suit No. FHC/MN/CS/18/09 contained in the judgment delivered on 23/3/10. The Respondent herein had taken an originating summons against the Appellants herein and submitted questions to the Federal High Court for determination in respect of the termination of her appointment with the 1st Respondent. Due to the challenge on the use of the originating summons by the Appellants, it is expedient to set out the questions as well as the relief as they appear thereon. The questions submitted to the Federal High Court for decision are thus:-

“i. Whether the Vice-Chancellor of the Federal University of Technology Minna or the Registrar possesses any power under the provisions of Section 15 of Federal Universities of Technology Act CAP F23 LFN 2004, to terminate the appointment of the Plaintiff without recourse to the Council

ii. Whether the Council or Senate of the Federal University of Technology Minna Niger State is not the appropriate authority to employ, discipline and terminate the employment of its legally employed staff as provided under Section 15 of Federal Universities of Technology Act CAP F23 LFN 2004.

iii. Whether the Plaintiff in the circumstances above is not a teaching staff of the Federal University of Technology Minna – Niger State, by virtue of her employment having not been lawfully terminated Premised on the above questions, the Respondent claimed the following declaratory and other reliefs:-

“a. A declaration that the purported termination is illegal and therefore null and void

b. A declaration that the Plaintiff is still in the service of the 1st Defendant

c. A declaration mandating the Defendants to pay the Plaintiff all entitlements and arrears of salary due to the Plaintiff from January, 2008 till date.

d An order compelling the Defendants, to reinstate the Plaintiff to her former position as a lecturer in the service of the Federal University of Technology Minna, Niger State.

e. An order compelling the Defendants to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of N2,139,388.08 (Two Million, One Hundred and Thirty Nine Thousand, Three Hundred and Eighty Eight Naira and Eight Kobo) being the money due from January, 2008 to April, 2009 at the rate of N33,711.80 (Thirty Three Thousand, Seven Hundred and Eleven Naira and Eight Kobo) per month.”

An eight (8) paragraph affidavit deposed to by Luka Noma; a Litigation Secretary in the chambers of the Respondent’s Counsel to which were attached copies of documents marked as Exhibits A-M, was filed in support of the originating summons.

A four (4) paragraph counter affidavit sworn to by Eucharia Orya; Litigation Secretary of the Appellants’ Counsel was filed in opposition to the originating summons. Copies of documents marked as Exhibits FUT 1-9 were annexed to the counter affidavit.

Written addresses were then filed and exchanged by the learned Counsel for the parties which were adopted when the initial effort at settlement of the case out of court was reported by Counsel to have failed.

In the judgment mentioned above, the Federal High Court granted the reliefs (a)-(d) as set out on the summons. However I have observed that even though the issue of the propriety of commencing the suit by way of originating summons was canvassed by the learned Counsel for the parties in their respective written addresses, the Federal High Court did not in its seven (7) page judgment consider or make any pronouncement on it.