Institute Of Health Ahmadu Bello University Hospital Management Board V. Mrs. Jummai R. I. Anyip (2011)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

S. MUNTAKA COOMASSIE. J.S.C,

The respondent herein Mrs Jummai R. I. Anyip, was an employee of the appellant and was interdicted by the appellant on an allegation of theft of expired drugs. In exhibit 3, the appellant clearly stated that the respondent’s fate would be determined by the outcome of the report of an Administrative Disciplinary Committee which was set up to investigate the allegations against her. The committee went into action and conducted investigations into the allegation made against the respondent. In its report which was tendered as Exhibits 5 and 6 the respondent was exonerated and recommended to be reinstated to her employment. Nonetheless, the appellant dismissed the respondent from its employment.

Dissatisfied, with the action of the appellant the respondent instituted this action against the appellant at Kaduna State High Court herein referred to as the trial court.

The respondent as plaintiff claimed against the appellant thus:-

“(a) AN ORDER declaring the purported dismissal of the plaintiff’s appointment by the defendant as null, void, and of no effect;

(b) AN ORDER declaring the appointment of the plaintiff by the defendant as valid and subsisting.

(c) Payment of all arrears of salaries, allowances and other benefit to which the plaintiff has been entitled from the 11th of June, 1995, being the date of her interdiction from duty, until the determination of this suit”.

(d) AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE to (a) (b) and (c) above, the sum of N350,000.00 as damages for wrongful dismissal”.

After the closure of the pleadings, both parties called their respective witnesses after which the counsel addressed the court. In its judgment the trial court dismissed all the plaintiff’s claims.

Dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, the plaintiff successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal Kaduna Division herein called (lower court). The lower court found merit in the appeal and allowed same. The lower court unanimously held thus:-

“The condition of appointment of the Institute, as contained in Chapter 2 Section 5 of the Institute of Health Staff Regulations includes the following;

“The Institute may at anytime for good course terminate your engagement by two months salary in lieu of notice”.

No provision is made in the said condition of service for dismissal on an unproved allegation of stealing which charge is generally in a contractual relationship, an employer is not bound to state the reasons why an employee’s appointment is terminated. See Taiwo V. Kingsway Store Ltd 19 NLR 122, (ii) Obe V. Nigersol Construction Co. Ltd (1972) 2 University of Ife Law Report (pt. 2).

The appointment and termination of an employee is a matter strictly between the parties. However, the dismissal of the appellant by the respondent which is the fact in issue is subject to intervention of the court since the disciplinary committee has no jurisdiction to try the appellant for a criminal offence. There is therefore no hesitation in holding that the dismissal of the appellant’s appointment on the ground of stealing is null and void. The court will rule that the appellant is entitled to claim her salary and allowances from the date of interdiction to the date of the ceasing of the appointment, not dismissal. The court has no jurisdiction to impose a servant on an unwilling master, unless the appointment has a statutory flavour. In the case the onus will be on the employee who alleged that he was wrongly removed from the appointment to so show. See College of Medicine V. Adegbite (1973) 5 SC. See also Nigeria Airways Ltd V. Yahaya Ahmadu (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt. 198) at 493. Afri-Bank Nigeria Plc V. Christopher Obi Nwuaeze (1988) 6 NWLR Pt. 553 at 286.