Michael Imodu National Institute For Labour Studies V. Shaidu Nda’j Maliki (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

TIJJANI ABDULLAHI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court, Ilorin Division, Coram; Bilkisu B. Aliyu J. delivered on the 2nd December, 2009 whereby the trial court made an order declaring that the termination of the employment of the Respondent by the Appellant through a letter of Notice of termination of probationary employment dated 24th November, 2008, Exhibit K was wrongful and ordered the reinstatement of the Respondent.

The Respondent was the plaintiff in the lower court whilst the Appellant was the defendant in that Court. The Respondent as plaintiff initiated an action against the Appellant as defendant by filing an originating summons whereby, he sought as follows:

“1. WHETHER upon a correct interpretation of the defendant’s Staff Regulations and Conditions of Service and Judgment of the Court of Appeal, Ilorin in Appeal No.CA/IL/22/2007 between the parties, the plaintiff can still be regarded as a probationary staff of the defendant as the defendant claims in her letters of 24th November, 2008 and 12th December, 2008?

2. WHETHER the plaintiff s appointment with the defendant having spanned a period of over 18 years can, be terminated by one month’s salary in lieu of notice as the defendant purported to do in this case vide her letter of 24th November, 2008?
3. WHETHER the purported terminated of the plaintiff’s appointment by the defendant is valid, having regard to her Staff Regulations and Conditions of Service as well as the relevant provisions of the Civil Service Rules?

WHEREUPON the plaintiff claims:

I. A DECLARATION that the plaintiff is no longer a probationary staff of the defendant but that he held a pensionable appointment at the date of his purported termination, having put in over 18 years of service with the defendant.

II. A DECLARATION that the purported termination of the plaintiff’s appointment by payment of one month’s salary in lieu of notice vide letter dated 24th December, 2008 is wrongful, ineffectual, null and void.

III. DECLARATION that the purported terminated of the plaintiff’s appointment by the defendant vide letter of 24th November, 2008 is ultra vires the defendant, unlawful, null and of no effect whatsoever.

IV. AN ORDER reinstating the plaintiff into the defendant’s employment and at the status he would have attained but for the unlawful termination of his appointment, and for payment of his salaries and other emoluments from the date of his purported termination until judgment be delivered herein.

DATED this 23rd day of February, 2009.

The originating summons is supported by an affidavit consisting of 18 paragraphs and a number of documents attached thereto as Exhibits, namely exhibits A – N. Reference will be made to these Exhibits as and when appropriate in the course of writing this ruling.

For this part, Respondent did not file a counter-affidavit to controvert the contests of the said supporting affidavit but he filed a notice of preliminary objection upon the following grounds:

(i) The prayers sought by the plaintiff herein are incompetent before this Honourable Court.

(ii) The plaintiff has a pending application before the court of Appeal, Ilorin seeking inter alia, an order of court reviewing the judgment of that court delivered on the 16th day of July, 2008.