Simiyu & 2 others (Petitioning on their own behalf and that of 57 other persons commonly described as the Roho Moja Genuine Squatters) v Attorney General & 5 others (Environment and Land Petition 15 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 3296 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Eldoret Land Court cancelled fraudulently obtained settlement plots, quashed the magistrates' court case over them, and ordered fresh investigation to resettle the genuine squatters.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Petitioners hold constitutional rights capable of enforcement over the suit property
Yes - as citizens they enjoy the rights under Articles 10, 28, 35 and 40 which the Court had jurisdiction to evaluate
The Court noted it was undisputed that the Petitioners occupied the suit property, that the Government had approved a Part Development Plan for a squatter settlement scheme, and that a Special District Plots Allocation Committee had approved a list of 60 genuine squatters on 24.11.2004. As citizens, the Petitioners were entitled to the rights in Articles 10, 28, 35 and 40, and the Court could evaluate whether these were breached in the alienation and allocation process.
Whether the Petitioners had an enforceable legitimate expectation to be allocated land in the settlement scheme
Yes - the meeting of 24.11.2004 constituted an express, clear and unambiguous promise by the Government through the Committee chaired by the District Commissioner
Applying the Supreme Court's tests in Communications Commission of Kenya v Royal Media Services and Sehmi v Tarabana, the Court found the 24.11.2004 decision was an express promise to alienate 0.10-0.20 hectares to all genuine squatters; it was reasonable, made by officers exercising delegated powers of the Commissioner of Lands under the Government Lands Act, and not contrary to law.
Whether the Respondents' conduct violated the Petitioners' constitutional rights
Yes - the substitution of the approved list of 60 squatters with a list of 92 persons including non-squatters violated Articles 10, 28, 35 and 40
The Respondents failed to produce the records of the alienation contrary to Article 35. EACC verification revealed plots allocated to the wife of the then Commissioner of Lands, an officer of the Commissioner's office, a Councillor and his family. Allocation to strangers of land reserved for genuine squatters breached Article 10 values and deprived the Petitioners of their Article 40 property interest.
Whether the Chief Magistrates Court had jurisdiction in ELC Case No. 17 of 2019
No - the subject property was valued at Kshs.160,000,000 far exceeding the Chief Magistrate's pecuniary jurisdiction of Kshs.20,000,000, rendering the proceedings a nullity
A valuation report dated 13.05.2019 valued the 92 plots at a market value of Kshs.160,000,000. The Magistrates Act limits the Chief Magistrates Court's pecuniary jurisdiction to Kshs.20,000,000. A court without jurisdiction cannot make valid orders; the proceedings contravened Article 50 and were quashed by certiorari.
Whether the National Land Commission breached Article 47 by failing to act on the Petitioners' complaint
No - the NLC eventually instructed its county office to investigate and was curtailed by the pending petition
The complaint was received on 12.09.2018 and unexplained delay followed until 2022, which prompted the petition. However, the NLC did act by instructing its Uasin Gishu office to investigate and conclude resettlement, and upon learning the matter was in court could not proceed until determination. The claim of breach was therefore not substantiated.
Legal principles established
#- A party relying on legitimate expectation must show an express, clear and unambiguous promise by a public authority, a reasonable expectation, a representation the decision-maker was competent to make, and no conflict with clear provisions of law or the Constitution
- Land reserved for settlement and allocation to squatters is no longer un-alienated government land capable of allocation to other parties
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the Respondents breached the Petitioners' rights under Articles 10, 28, 35, 40 and 50 of the Constitution by denying the genuine squatters their land rights measuring between 0.10 and 0.20 hectares on the suit property, and breached the tenet of legitimate expectation
- 2.Order of certiorari quashing the decision of the District Land Officer dated 25.11.2005 and the District Commissioner dated 23.12.2005 reviewing the original list of squatters, and all Letters of Allotment issued pursuant thereto
- 3.Order of certiorari quashing the pleadings, proceedings, orders and/or decrees in Eldoret Chief Magistrates Court Environment & Land Case No. 17 of 2019 (Moses Jacob Simiyu & 2 Others v Charles Wanyama Simiyu & 2 Others)
- 4.Order of certiorari quashing the decision to create the amended Registry Index Map (RIM) under Plan F/R No. 439/77-78 representing the listed survey parcels, as contained in the letters dated 15th February 2018 and 24th April 2018
- 5.The County Land Registrar, Uasin Gishu ordered to forthwith cancel and expunge any certificates of title issued to the Interested Parties and to any of the 92 persons in the purported list of squatters pursuant to the quashed RIM
- 6.The 2nd Respondent (National Land Commission) to proceed with its own investigation into the genuine settlers on the land parcel and conclude the matter of re-settlement of the squatters
- 7.Each party to bear its own costs of the Petition
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 22 and 258 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (enforcement of Bill of Rights) read with the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules, 2013
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Simiyu & 2 others (Petitioning on their own behalf and that of 57 other persons commonly described as the Roho Moja Genuine Squatters) v Attorney General & 5 others (Environment and Land Petition 15 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 3296 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Petition No. 15 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3296/eng@2026-05-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.