Nigerian Railway Corporation V. Charles Okwudili Umera (2006)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BADA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court Enugu, delivered on the 15th day of September, 2000.

The plaintiff now respondent took out a writ of summons in the court below in the following terms:

“(1) An order of declaration that the purported retirement of the plaintiff from the defendant’s services on March 10, 1994 “with immediate effect” is null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

(2) An order of declaration that the purported retirement of the plaintiff from the defendant’s services is illegal, and is utterly in breach of the plaintiff’s contract and conditions of service.

(3) An order of declaration that the plaintiff’s purported retirement from the defendant’s services without any hearing whatsoever, is unconstitutional, punitive, and a clear violation of all rules of natural justice as well as infringing the plaintiff’s right to fair hearing as provided for in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

(4) An order of declaration that the plaintiff is and continues to remain in the service and employment of the defendant.

(5) An injunction to restrain the defendant and its agents and servants from interfering with or disturbing the plaintiff in his employment in the defendant Corporation without due regard to the plaintiff’s condition of service and contract with the defendant.

IN THE ALTERNATIVE

(6) An order on the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten million Naira) damages to cover plaintiff’s salary for the unexpired period of service up to the time plaintiff shall have been due for retirement, housing and other allowances and other special and general damages for the defendant’s breach of the plaintiff’s contract of service.”

The lower court in its considered judgment stated thus:

” … He gave evidence that he was employed by the defendant into the permanent and pensionable staff cadre in the year 1962. According to him, his said appointment was terminated by a letter he received from the defendant on 10th March, 1994. The letter purported to retire him “with immediate effect.” Plaintiff said as a pensionable staff-member of the defendant, he ought not to have been retired “with immediate effect” but after attaining the age of 60 years; according to the defendant’s Scheme of Service. He was in fact only 52 years old at the time he was compulsorily retired. He tendered a copy of the Scheme of Service of the defendant and it was admitted and marked exhibit “A”.

He tendered the letter of compulsory retirement and it was admitted as exhibit B. Of course, witness also tendered a copy of the pre-action notice he served on the defendant in compliance with section 83 of the Nigerian Railway Corporation Act Cap. 323 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990. Notice was admitted in evidence and marked exhibit “C”. That marked the end of his case.

….