Metto v Uasin Gishu County Public Service Board & 3 others (Cause 35 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 363 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A governor's personal staff have jobs that end with the governor's term, though courts can still order counties to pay equal allowances owed to similar public officers.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Status of the claimant's employment - public officer vs personal staff of the Governor
The claimant was personal staff of the Governor on a contract coterminous with the Governor's elective term; his termination at the end of the term was not unfair.
The position was never advertised as required by section 37 of the Public Service Commission Act and section 66 of the County Government Act; the claimant was nominated by the Governor. Although remunerated from public funds, making him technically a public officer under article 260, permanent and pensionable status must be expressly stated. His contract ended with the Governor's term notwithstanding re-election.
Entitlement to non-practicing and other allowances
The claimant was entitled to non-practicing allowance of Ksh 30,000/= per month by analogy with officers of similar rank, but other allowances were disallowed as not contractually provided.
The claimant left private practice to join public service, and denying him allowances paid to similar legal officers (e.g. in Kakamega County) would be discriminatory under article 232. The SRC letter of July 28, 2016 did not suspend payment, it merely awaited review. However, non-conventional allowances must be specifically provided for in the contract, and only house and commuter allowances were.
Lawfulness of salary reduction and recovery of overpayments
The reduction and recovery were lawful because they aligned payment with SRC's constitutional mandate under article 230.
The claimant's initial salary was paid outside the formal structure, without a personnel number and not through the IPPD system. Article 230(4)(a) empowers SRC to set and review remuneration of state officers and advise on that of other public officers, so payment through formal channels ensures alignment with SRC advice.
Legal principles established
#- A public officer is only hired on permanent and pensionable terms where the letter of appointment specifically states so; it cannot be assumed.
- A contract of personal service to a Governor is coterminous with the Governor's elective term and does not survive re-election without a fresh appointment.
- Denying a public officer allowances payable to officers of similar professional experience and level in public service amounts to discrimination contrary to article 232 of the Constitution.
Court orders
#- 1.Award of non-practicing allowance of Ksh 1,800,000/= for the five years the claimant worked for the respondent, subject to taxes and statutory deductions
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution (ELRC jurisdiction over employment and labour relations), the claim being by a public officer against a County Government
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Metto v Uasin Gishu County Public Service Board & 3 others (Cause 35 of 2020) [2023] KEELRC 363 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Cause No 35 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/363/eng@2023-02-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.