Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedPetition dated 13th January 2015· [2025] KEELRC 2333 (KLR)

Kithute v National Police Service Commission & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E005 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2333 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 July 2025
MNMATHEWS NDUMA
1,548 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court dismissed a police officer's challenge to his transfer because his petition never specified which constitutional rights were violated, and he skipped the required written medical-objection procedure.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
A police constable, previously based at Traffic Dagoretti Base, challenged his transfer by letter dated 2nd January 2025 to Machakos Police Station for general duties. He alleged the transfer was a disguised disciplinary sanction following disciplinary meetings for undisclosed misconduct and compulsory leave in November 2024, and relied on a medical report from Prof. C.F Otieno documenting diabetes mellitus and hypertension treated at Mater Misericordia Hospital since 2017. He sought quashing of the transfer and an order barring deployment to stations where his health was at risk. The Respondents, through a replying affidavit of Chief Inspector Wambani Victoria, denied any disciplinary action, maintained the transfer was a routine administrative exercise involving 14 other officers, and pointed out that the Petitioner never made a written objection on medical or compassionate grounds as required under Chapter 72 of the Service Standing Orders. The court framed two issues: whether the petition disclosed a cause of action and whether the Petitioner was entitled to the reliefs sought. Applying Khan Khan's Mburu v Inspector General Police Service, the court held that a party alleging violation of a right must plead with precision the right violated, the constitutional article and the jurisdictional basis. The petition named no constitutional provision in its particulars of violations or reliefs and failed that test. The court also ruled out the Petitioner's medical condition as a bar since the prescribed procedure under paragraph 6para 2 Chapter 72 of the SSO was never invoked and the demand letter made no reference to medical grounds. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, the court noting the Petitioner had served over 31 years.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the petition discloses a constitutional cause of action

Holding

The petition does not disclose any constitutional cause of action because it does not plead with precision the constitutional provisions violated

Reasoning

The court found that the particulars of violations and reliefs sought did not name any provision of the Constitution or statute allegedly violated. Relying on Khan Khan's Mburu v Inspector General Police Service, the court held that constitutional claims must plead with accuracy and precision the right violated, the article infringed and the jurisdictional basis. The petition failed that test.

p. 4
02

Whether the Petitioner's medical condition barred the transfer

Holding

The medical condition did not bar the transfer because the Petitioner did not follow the procedure under paragraph 6para 2 Chapter 72 of the SSO

Reasoning

The Petitioner did not invoke paragraph 6para 2 Chapter 72 of the standing orders by applying in writing for review of the transfer on medical or compassionate grounds. The demand letter of 8th January 2025 did not refer to any medical condition, instead relying on unsubstantiated allegations of disciplinary meetings without documentary evidence.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A party alleging violation of a right or fundamental freedom must plead with precision the right violated, the article of the Constitution violated and the jurisdictional basis for the claim.
  • A police officer seeking an objection to a transfer on medical or compassionate grounds must make an application in writing in accordance with the standing orders for consideration by the commission.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 245
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 23
  • National Police Service Act 2011section 110[1][r]
  • National Police Standing Orders [SSO]Chapter 72, paragraphs 5[1], 6[2] and 14
  • National Police Standing Orders [SSO]Chapter 30

Cases cited (1)

  • Khan Khan's Mburu v Inspector General Police Service and 3 others
    [2019] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 23 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kithute v National Police Service Commission & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E005 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2333 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 13th January 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2333/eng@2025-07-31

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