Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedELCLC PET E002 OF 2025· [2026] KEELC 4660 (KLR)

Ng'ang'a & another v Murang’a County Government & 3 others (Environment and Land Petition E002 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4660 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
22 July 2026
MGM. N. Gicheru
1,242 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court dismissed a challenge to a Murang'a County quarry tender because the petitioners skipped NEMA and procurement review channels first.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Petitioners challenged tender MCG RFP 2024, by which the Respondent (Murang'a County Government) outsourced quarry mining operations on L.R. 9213/1 and 2 for one year. They sought declarations that the tender violated Articles 35, 42 and 227 of the Constitution for want of public participation and absence of an Environmental Impact Assessment, orders of certiorari to quash the tender and prohibition against quarrying on the suit parcels, and costs. The 1st Respondent filed a notice of preliminary objection dated 29-8-2025 on four grounds: failure to refer the environmental dispute to the National Environment Tribunal under Section 125 of EMCA, failure to refer procurement complaints to the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board, non-exhaustion of remedies under EMCA and the Public Procurement and Disposal Act, and lack of jurisdiction under the exhaustion doctrine. No submissions were filed by either side. Framing two issues, the court held that the Petitioners ought first to have lodged their environmental complaints with NEMA, applying the Karume principle that statutory redress procedures must be strictly followed, and that they failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances under Section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act warranting exemption from exhaustion. The petition was dismissed with no orders as to costs on 22 July 2026.

Key legal issues

#
01

Compliance with statutory redress procedures under EMCA and the Public Procurement and Disposal Act

Holding

The Petitioners did not comply; they should first have raised their environmental complaints with NEMA before coming to court

Reasoning

The court found NEMA has the statutory mandate over noise pollution and hazardous waste concerns arising from quarrying. Relying on the Karume principle, where a clear statutory procedure exists it must be strictly followed. The Petitioners bypassed NEMA and the procurement review mechanisms, so the petition was prematurely before the court.

p. 4
02

Exception to the exhaustion doctrine under Section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act

Holding

The Petitioners did not prove exceptional circumstances warranting exemption from exhausting statutory remedies

Reasoning

The court listed exceptional circumstances including inadequacy of the prescribed remedy, lack of jurisdiction in the statutory body, constitutional questions the specialized body cannot adequately determine, and breach of natural justice. The Petitioners demonstrated none of these, so the exemption was not available and the preliminary objection succeeded.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where there is a clear procedure for redress of a particular grievance prescribed by the Constitution or an Act of Parliament, that procedure should be strictly followed
  • Exemption from the exhaustion requirement under Section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act applies only in exceptional circumstances such as inadequacy of the prescribed remedy, lack of jurisdiction in the statutory body, constitutional questions beyond the body's competence, or breach of natural justice

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The petition dated 4-2-2025 is dismissed
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (Articles 35, 42, 227 as invoked in the petition); court determining jurisdiction vis-à-vis exhaustion of remedies under EMCA, Public Procurement and Disposal Act and Section 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ng'ang'a & another v Murang’a County Government & 3 others (Environment and Land Petition E002 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 4660 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCLC PET E002 OF 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4660/eng@2026-07-22

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.