Ondigi & 6 others v Nyamira County Public Service Board (Miscellaneous Application E034 of 2026) [2026] KEELRC 2193 (KLR) (28 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELRC 2193 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT KISII MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E034 OF 2026 NZIOKI WA MAKAU, J JULY 28, 2026 BETWEEN EDWARD VINCENT ONDIGI & 6 OTHERS & 6 OTHERS & 6 OTHERS .................................................................................................... APPLICANT AND NYAMIRA COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD ......................... RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Application before me seeks the following orders i. The Honourable Court recognizes and adopts as a judgment the ndings, decision, and verdict of the Public Service Commission (PSC) dated 27th August 2025 in County Governments Public Service Appeals No. 075 of 2024 as consolidated with Appeals Nos. 076, 078, 080, 081, 083, and 084 of 2024, Thomson Bala Odhiambo & 6 others v Nyamira County Public Service Board as an order and decree of this Honourable Court. ii. The Honourable Court directs the Respondent to implement the decision of the Public Service Commission (PSC) dated 27th August 2025 in County Governments Public Service Appeals No. 075 of 2024 as consolidated with Appeals Nos. 076, 078, 080, 081, 083 and 084 of 2024, Thomson Bala Odhiambo & 6 others v Nyamira County Public Service Board to pay the Appellants (Applicants herein) the dierence in their salaries and allowances as from June 2024, when their promotions were reversed, to 27th August 2025. 2. The application is supported by the adavit of the Applicant Mr. John Makori Ondieki the 5th Applicant. 3. The application is unopposed. It is one which seeks the promotion of the 7 Applicants. In the case of Alfred Nyungu Kimungui v Bomas of Kenya [2013] KEELRC 235 (KLR) it was held that it was improper for Courts to interfere with the managerial prerogatives of an employer. As stated by my https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2193/eng@2026-07-28 1
page 1 of 2
brother Rika J. (citing a decision in the case Industrial Court Cause Number 1200 of 2012 Professor Gitile Naituli v University Council Multimedia University College & another “ The Employment Act does not intend that Courts take away managerial prerogatives from employers. To give the interim order would have the eect of stiing the management prerogative in sta administration. It would mean the employer does not have any more say in the contract of employment it has authored. This would be contrary to the intention of the Employment Act, which seeks to merely protect the weaker of the bargaining partners, not deprive the employer the power to run its business altogether.” 4. I am in agreement with the dicta of my learned brother on the bench and therefore will not interpose between the Applicants and their employer the Respondent before me. It is not for the Court to give promotions at the workplace nor can I recommend the promotion or salary increases proposed in the motion before me. Application is dismissed with no order as to costs since the Respondent has not even entered appearance. It is so ordered. DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISII THIS 28TH DAY OF JULY 2026 NZIOKI WA MAKAU, MCIARB. JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2193/eng@2026-07-28 2
page 2 of 2