Mr. Sinclair A. Jambo V. The Governor Of Rivers State & Ors. (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

SAULAWA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the decision of the Rivers State High Court, Port Harcourt Judicial Division, coram E. N. T. Ebete, J.; dated 30/4/2004. The appellant was a civil servant whose last place of work was the Establishment, Training and Pensions Bureau, Rivers State. He was however compulsorily retired from service with effect from 30/12/99. On 24/02/2000, the appellant filed a writ of summons registered as PHC/375/2000 in the trial court against the respondents seeking the following reliefs:

Endorsement of claim

I. That the plaintiff is still entitled to the occupation of his official residential quarters until the full payment of his retirement benefits.

2. A declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to the full payment of his salaries for the months of December 1999, January 2000.
3. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents and servants and whosoever acting for or on behalf of the defendants from ejecting the plaintiff from his official quarters No. 18 Omoku Street, D/Line, Port Harcourt pending the full payment of the plaintiff’s retirement benefits.

Its instructive that in addition to the writ of summons alluded to above, the appellant had also filed in the trial court a motion on notice on 24/02/2000 seeking the following relief:

1. An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants, their servants or agents or whosoever acting for or on behalf of the defendants from ejecting or evicting the plaintiff from his official quarters No. 18 Omoku Street, D/Line, Port Harcourt pending the determination of this suit.

In response to the motion on notice in question, the respondents filed in the trial court a 17 paragraphed affidavit to the effect, inter alia, thus:

(10) That it is of a general knowledge to every civil servant that they are only entitled to 3 months to remain in any official quarters after retirement.

(11) That the effective date of retirement of the plaintiff/applicant being the 26/11/99, he is expected as a matter of practice to leave by latest on the 28th February, 2001, as was indicated to him in exhibit C (Final quit notice).

(12) That the plaintiff/applicant has now overstayed by over one year even after being given the normal 3 months notice which expired since.

(13) That the plaintiff/applicant is not making any effort to vacate the official quarters even though most of his counterparts have vacated theirs having processed their forms and already paid their gratuities.

(14) That the essence of this application is merely to hold the Government of Rivers State to ransom; with the aim of depriving other legitimate serving civil servant in the face of the current acute accommodation problems in the State.

As it would appear at pages 25 – 26 of the records of appeal, the motion for the interlocutory injunction in question was moved by the appellant’s counsel on 10/01/03. However, when the motion later came up on 21/4/04 for reply, the learned trial Judge ordered thus:

“Motion is adjourned to 30/4/2004 for the court to find out whether the cause of this action still exists.”

On the said 30/4/04, the two learned counsel addressed the court on the vexed issue of cause of action. Consequently, the learned trial Judge ruled thus: