Mr. Uduak Bernard Okon V. The Governor Of Akwa Ibom State & Ors (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

At the High Court of Justice of Akwa Ibom State, Uyo Judicial Division, the appellant in this appeal [as plaintiff] commenced the action culminating into this appeal against the respondents herein (as defendants). He claimed the following reliefs as per his Amended Statement of Claim:

(a) A declaration that it is unlawful for the officials of the second defendant to hinder the plaintiff from entering his office and also refused (sic) to pay his salaries from March, 2005 till date;

(b) An order of court directing the General Manager of the second defendant to pay all the salaries/allowances of the plaintiff from March, 2005 till date;

(c) The sum of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira) only as special and general damages for embarrassing the plaintiff causing him and members of his family untold hardship by refusing to pay his salaries;

(d) An order of court directing (sic) the second defendant, their agents, assigns and privies from illegally causing the plaintiff to be arrested and detained by law enforcement agencies for the purpose of hindering the plaintiff from proving this case;

(f) A declaration that the processes leading to and the actual termination of the employment of the plaintiff through the second defendant’s purported letter of dismissal dated February 23, 2005 was unlawful and contrary to the principles of fair hearing.

The defendants/respondents greeted the suit with a preliminary objection predicated on section 1(1) of the Public Officers Protection Law Cap, 140, vol.5, Laws of Akwa Ibom State. The lower court’s order dismissing the said suit prompted this appeal.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Way back in 1983, the plaintiff/appellant was employed, by what used to be known as the Cross River Television Authority, as a Cameraman. Akwa Ibom State was carved out of Cross River State in 1987. Thereafter, the second defendant/respondent was incorporated to take over the staff, assets and liabilities of the then Cross River State Television Authority, including the plaintiff/appellant.

On August 19, 2002, the plaintiff/appellant wrote to the second defendant/respondent. He claimed to have obtained two additional qualifications, the National and Higher National Diploma certificates [(ND/HND) (Business Science) from the Institute of Management and Technology, Enugu, (hereinafter, simply, referred to as “IMT Enugu”]. He requested for conversion/transfer to any department in which his acquired skill would be, duly, expressed.

The second defendant/respondent wrote the Registrar of IMT, Enugu for confirmation and verification of the said Certificates. Lo! It was discovered that the said Certificates were forged. As expected, the said second defendant/respondent commenced disciplinary proceedings against him. He appeared before the Administrative Panel of Inquiry [hereinafter, simply, called “the Panel”] which was set up to look into the matter. He was directed to bring the originals of these certificates the next day.

He did not do this. Rather, he submitted a letter, titled “Appeal,” dated June 24, 2004. In that letter, he implored the Panel to discontinue further inquiries into the matter and discountenance the said certificates. The Panel did not oblige him. It concluded its assignment. It submitted a report in which it recommended his dismissal from service for misconduct. On February 23, 2005, the plaintiff/appellant was dismissed from service and his salary was stopped.

On May 19, 2008, more than three months after his dismissal, he took out the said Writ of Summons. He claimed the reliefs already set out above. In paragraph 22 of their joint Amended Statement of Defence, the defendants/respondents gave notice of their intention to challenge the competence of the suit. The notice was anchored on the ground that the suit was statute barred by virtue of section 1(1) of the Public officers Protection Law Cap, 140, vol.5, Laws of Akwa Ibom State having been commenced more than three months after the cause of action arose. After he had closed his case, he applied for the further amendment of his Amended Statement of claim. The lower court dismissed the application.