Catright v Public Service Commission; Principal Secretary State Department for Lands and Physical Planning (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Application E040 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 459 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court upheld the Public Service Commission's power to discipline staff directly despite delegation, and confirmed the dismissal of an officer who went absent without explanation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the respondent could discipline the applicant despite delegation to the interested party's Authorized Officer
Yes; the delegation did not divest the Commission of its powers and the respondent was entitled to conduct the disciplinary proceedings itself.
Section 31(3)(b) of the PSC Act provides delegation does not divest the Commission of responsibility. Regulation 5(2) of the PSC Regulations allows the Commission to take corrective measures on its own motion or upon appeal or review. Article 234(2)(b) vests disciplinary control in the Commission, section 65(1) of the PSC Act vests disciplinary power in it, and clause 27 of the delegation instrument reserves the Commission's Article 234 powers. No prejudice or manifest injustice was shown.
Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing and fair administrative action
No; the applicant was accorded a fair process and his allegations of procedural unfairness were unfounded.
The applicant was issued notices to show cause, responded to them, appeared before the Discipline Committee, made submissions which were considered, and was informed of his right of appeal. He never requested to cross-examine officers present. He offered no answer to the allegations of absence from duty on the merits, and the Court found he fully contributed to his dismissal, making the grievances and claimed rights violations unjustified.
Whether the dismissal for absence from duty was valid and fair
Yes; the reason for dismissal was valid and the applicant was the author of his own predicament.
In ELRC Petition No. E127 of 2023 (Mwaure J, judgment dated 21.12.2023) it was found that the applicant disobeyed a lawful order to report to his new station and his whereabouts were unclear from June 2022 to March 2023. Despite several notices to show cause he failed to explain his whereabouts. In these proceedings he made no attempt to answer the allegations on the merits, so the dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair.
Legal principles established
#- A delegation by the Public Service Commission does not divest the Commission of responsibility for the exercise of delegated powers, and the Commission may take corrective measures or exercise its disciplinary powers notwithstanding the delegation.
Court orders
#- 1.The application (notice of motion dated 07.08.2024) is dismissed
- 2.Each party to bear own costs of the proceedings
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 53 rule 1(1)(2) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 8(2) of the Law Reform Act; inherent power and jurisdiction of the Court
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Catright v Public Service Commission; Principal Secretary State Department for Lands and Physical Planning (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Application E040 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 459 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review (Notice of Motion dated 07.08.2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/459/eng@2025-02-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.