Olowokere Anthony Abiodun V. The Governing Council Adeyemi College Of Education Ondo (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOORE A. A. ADUMEIN, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appellant was employed as an Accountant II by the respondent vide letter dated the 4th day of December, 1990 and his appointment was confirmed through another letter dated 22nd June, 1995. The two letters were admitted by the lower court as exhibits 1 and 2, respectively. The appellant served in different capacities and was by a letter dated 1st December, 2003 (exhibit 5) appointed head of the respondent’s internal audit unit. Between 1995 and 2004 the appellant was severally promoted vide exhibits 3A, 3B and 3C and he also received letters of commendation dated 9th April, 2002 and 8th January, 2004 exhibits 98 and 9A respectively, notwithstanding that he had earlier been issued two queries in 1994 and 1996 (exhibits 19 and 17); series of events however occurred in the respondent’s college resulting into crisis.

An administrative committee of inquiry into the crisis was undertaken by the Federal Ministry of Education. An audit of the financial activities of the college was also carried out. By exhibits 20 and 18, the summary of the audit report and that of the administrative committee of inquiry showed that the appellant was implicated. The appellants appointment was consequently terminated by a letter from the respondent with Ref. No.RPA/OLO/P.1265/65 dated 26th November, 2004 exhibit 12.

After two appeals for a review of the termination of his appointment were refused, the appellant took out an action in the Federal High Court, Akure Judicial Division in suit No.FHC/AK/CS/14/2005 and claimed in his amended statement of claim as follows:

“Whereof the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant as follows:

(a) A DECLARATION that the letter of termination of appointment of the Plaintiff dated 26th day of November, 2004 is illegal, unlawful, wrongful, inoperative, unconstitutional and therefore null, void and of no legal effect.

(b) A DECLARATION that the Plaintiff is entitled to be reinstated to the service of Adeyemi College of Education with all the requisites of office, rights, promotions and entitlements which the plaintiff is entitled from the date of termination of the date of judgment and until the plaintiff is fully reinstated to his office.

OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE

(a) ADECLARATION that the plaintiff is entitled to retirement with payment in accordance with retirement benefits as contained in the regulation governing the condition of services.

(b) A DECLARATION that the plaintiff’s retirement benefits shall be calculated in line with his entitlement to promotion, yearly increment and all other allowances incidental to his promotion from the date of termination to the date of judgment and until the judgment is fully implemented.”

The appellant’s claim was disputed by the respondent as the defendant in the lower court. Initially, the respondent was the 2nd defendant while the 1st defendant in the court below was “THE HON. MINISTER FOR EDUCATION FEDERAL MINISTRY OF EDUCATION ABUJA”. A preliminary objection was filed in the lower court contending that the 1st defendant therein was not a juristic person and the objection was sustained. The name of THE HON. MINISTER FOR EDUCATION FEDERAL MINISTRY OF EDUCATION ABUJA” was consequently struck out. The case was, therefore, fought between the appellant and the respondent only.

Evidence was led by both parties, written addresses were filed, exchanged and adopted. In a reserved judgment delivered on the 14th day of October, 2010 the learned trial Judge dismissed the appellant’s claim – both the main and alternative claims. Being dissatisfied the appellant filed a notice of appeal containing 7 (seven) grounds. The parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument. The appellant formulated four issues for determination, namely:

“(A) Whether or not the Honourable Minister of Education is a Juristic personality

(B) Whether or not on proper interpretation of S8 of Federal College of Education Act, the Minister directives on matter of general character or matter of policy include individual employment and whether where Ministers’ directives cover every administrative action the college is not bound to follow the procedure that governs the Plaintiffs (sic) employment in carrying out the directives.