Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2019] KEELRC 235 (KLR)

David Githaka Gaichu & 129 others v Tharaka Nithi County Government & another [2019] KEELRC 235 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
2 December 2019
3,824 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~15 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

130 former village administrators lost their case because Kenyan law required them to appeal to the Public Service Commission before going to court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
One hundred and thirty Claimants, engaged as Village Administrators by the County Government of Tharaka Nithi in February 2017 on permanent and pensionable terms, were terminated effective early October 2017 after notices to show cause alleging that their posts were non-existent and their appointments irregular. They claimed the terminations were unfair, unprocedural and illegal and sought reinstatement, payment of salaries, allowances and arrears of Kshs. 23,392/- per month, costs and interest. The Respondents maintained the appointments were made in contravention of the Constitution and the County Governments Act, were fraudulent and irregular, and that the Claimants were heard both in writing and orally before termination under Section 75 of the County Governments Act read with Article 236 of the Constitution. Witnesses on both sides testified, and the parties filed competing submissions. In submissions the Respondents for the first time raised the objection that under Section 77 of the County Governments Act the Claimants were obliged to appeal to the Public Service Commission, rendering the suit premature; the Claimants countered that jurisdiction was never raised by way of preliminary objection. The court found that the Claimants were obliged to exhaust the appeal mechanism to the Public Service Commission and could not bypass clear statutory provisions. Following the decision in Republic v Secretary County Public Service Board ex parte Hulbai Gedi Abdille, the court held the suit unmerited, dismissed it, and ordered each party to bear their own costs. Judgment was delivered at Nyeri on 2nd December 2019 by Nzioki wa Makau, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction and exhaustion of statutory remedies

Holding

The Court held it lacked competence to entertain the claim because the Claimants were obliged to appeal to the Public Service Commission under Section 77 of the County Governments Act before coming to court

Reasoning

Section 77 of the County Governments Act provides that any person dissatisfied or affected by a decision of a County Public Service Board, including disciplinary control, may appeal to the Public Service Commission. The court held that litigants cannot choose what part of a statute to follow, and that the Claimants should have approached the Commission rather than filing suit in this Court. The suit was accordingly found unmerited and dismissed, with each party bearing their own costs.

p. 4
02

Whether the termination of the Claimants' employment was fair, procedural and legal

Holding

Not conclusively determined; the claim was dismissed on the jurisdictional ground of failure to exhaust the statutory appeal mechanism

Reasoning

The Claimants argued they were denied a fair hearing and that no minutes or notice of hearing were produced, and that the employer had to prove reasons for termination under Section 43 of the Employment Act. The Respondents maintained that written and oral hearings were held and relied on Section 75 of the County Governments Act and Article 236 of the Constitution to justify correcting unlawful appointments. The court did not reach the merits, dismissing the suit on the jurisdictional objection.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a statute provides a clear procedure for challenging a decision, that procedure must be followed; a litigant cannot bypass legislation and come directly to court
  • A person dissatisfied with a decision of a County Public Service Board, including disciplinary control against a county public officer, must appeal to the Public Service Commission under Section 77 of the County Governments Act

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimants' suit is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • County Governments ActSection 77
  • County Governments ActSection 75
  • County Governments ActSections 48, 52(1), 52(3), 65, 66
  • Employment ActSection 43
  • Evidence ActSection 61
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 10, 47, 175(b), 201, 232, 236; Chapter 6
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 2 Rule 4
  • Tharaka Nithi Village Unit Delineation Bill, 2016Not specified

Cases cited (9)

  • Crown Foods Ltd v General Cargo Service
    [2019] eKLR
  • Callen Gatune Francis v Tharaka Nithi County Public Service Board & Another
    [2018] eKLR
  • Methodist Church Trustees Registered v The Attorney General & 6 Others
    [2010] eKLR
  • Republic v Secretary County Public Board & another Ex parte Hulbai Gedi Abdille
    [2015] eKLR
  • Nabro Properties Ltd v Sky Structures Limited
    [2002] Vol. 2 KLR 299
  • Kenya Revenue Authority v Menginya Salim Murgani
    [2010] eKLR
  • Speaker of the National Assembly v James Njenga Karume
    [1992] eKLR
  • Kenya Airways Limited v Aviation & Allied Workers Union Kenya & 3 Others
    [2014] eKLR
  • Macfoy v United Africa Company Ltd
    [1961] 3 All ER 1179
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Act; challenged by Respondents under Section 77 of the County Governments Act requiring appeal to the Public Service Commission

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "David Githaka Gaichu & 129 others v Tharaka Nithi County Government & another [2019] KEELRC 235 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/235/eng@2019-12-02

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