Republic v Maasai Mara University Council & another; Ex parte Okiya Omtatah Okoiti [2021] KEELRC 1647 (KLR)

The court adopted the Pastoli criteria, holding that a judicial review applicant must show the decision is tainted with illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. Acting without jurisdiction or ultra vires constitutes illegality. The Applicant's challenge went to the Committee's jurisdiction, not the merits of the reinstatement decision, so the court was within its judicial review province of examining the decision-making process rather than acting as an appellate court over the decider.

The court found the CBA applied only to staff in Grades 5 to 15 and the 2nd Respondent, at Grade 17, was outside it, so the Committee established under section 5.1(n) of the CBA lacked jurisdiction. Further, Statute XXXIX(h) contemplates appeals to the Council by Academic, Senior Library and Administrative staff, and to the Vice Chancellor for junior and middle level staff, neither category covering a Deputy Vice Chancellor. The Appeals Committee under the First Schedule receives appeals only from the Disciplinary Committee of Council, not from the full Council.

Having found the Ad Hoc Appeals Committee lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal at all, the court declined to make any determination on whether the appeal was filed outside the fourteen working days allowed under the Human Resource Policy paragraph 3.31(e), as the finding on jurisdiction was fatal to the appeal regardless.

The court held that the 1st Respondent, being a public body, is bound by the national values and principles of governance under Article 10, the leadership and integrity principles under Article 73, and the values of public service under Article 232. This supported the conclusion that the impugned ultra vires reinstatement process offended the Constitution and warranted the certiorari, prohibition and mandamus orders sought.