Industrial Court Nullifies Employment Termination of Mr Chendu, 99 Others from College of Education
…faults action of the State Governor
The Presiding Judge, Jos Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court, Hon. Justice Ibrahim Galadima has declared the purported suspension and termination, nullification and cancellation of Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ from the College of Education Gindiri by the Plateau State Governor as unlawful, illegal, null and void, and without any effect.
The Court declared that the Plateau State Governor has no power or authority to suspend, terminate, nullify, or interfere in any way with the employment and appointments of Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others duly engaged in the services and employment of the College of Education Gindiri.
Justice Galadima granted an order reinstating Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others to their respective positions as staff and employees of the College of Education, Gindiri, in accordance with their respective letters of appointment.
The Court also awarded the sum of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira) as general damages against the Plateau State Governor, Its Attorney General and College of Education Gindiri jointly and severally for the collective pain and suffering imposed on Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ by the respondents with the sum of N100,000 cost of action within 30 days.
From facts, the claimants- Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ had submitted that they were offered various employment positions in 2020 at the Gindiri College of Education, and were reportedly suspended by the Plateau State Governor, who later allegedly terminated their employment through announcements.
They averred that when new leadership took over the Plateau State, the Plateau State Governor announced the suspension of all Plateau State government employees hired from October 2022 to May 29, 2023, which included the applicants.
Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ contended that the termination of their employment by the Plateau State Governor was not justified by any regulatory instruments or current laws governing their employment with the College.
In defence, the defendants- Plateau State Governor and 2 Others averred that no advertisement was placed to indicate the vacant positions in the college before Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others were purportedly employed which made their employment inconsistent with the rules and regulations of the 3rd respondent institution. Accordingly also, Mr. Dake Chendu and 99 others’ were never interviewed by the Appointment and Promotion Committee as prescribed by the law regulating the College.
The Plateau State Governor and 2 others posited that when Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others were suspended, they were still on a 3-year probation period and had not yet achieved permanent employment status with the College. Therefore, the rules of service of the 3rd respondent do not entirely apply to them.
Plateau State Governor and 2 others filed a notice of preliminary objection and urged the Court to dismiss the case for want of requisite jurisdiction on the ground that Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others were employed by the College of Education Gindiri, but their appointment were yet to be confirmed, and also that the matter cannot be sustained by the applicants jointly claiming the reliefs against the respondents individually.
In opposition, the learned counsel to Mr. Dake Chendu and 99 others’, NANTOK DASHUWAR; E.S. BUF; M.L. KYEMANG posited that only the employer has the authority to dismiss their clients, and urged the Court to grant the reliefs sought.
Delivering judgment after careful analysis of the submissions of both parties, the Presiding Judge, Justice Ibrahim Galadima overruled the Plateau State Governor’s objection and held that despite Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ being on probation, their rights stemming from their statutory employment remain intact, and such employment must be managed in accordance with the statutes and relevant regulations of the Gindiri College of Education.
The Court agreed that Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ employment could be terminated during the probationary period, but the defendants must adhere to the specified provisions guiding such employment.
Justice Galadima stated that the defendants’ arguments that the claimants’ employment was not advertised and was tainted with irregularities, and alleged failure to follow proper employment procedures was the responsibility of the 3rd respondent, not the applicants.
Justice Galadima noted that the manner in which the Plateau State Governor treated Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others as if they were political appointees serving at the 1st respondent’s discretion was legally indefensible.
The Court held that the action of the Plateau State Governor and 2 others constituted an executive wrongdoing for which the Plateau State Governor must be held accountable to ensure justice.
On the claimants’ claim for salary, the Court held that Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others’ lack of evidence to substantiate the claim for unpaid salaries is detrimental to their case as there is no evidence to support the claim that Mr Dake Chendu and 99 others were not paid their salaries or to indicate the last month they received payment.
