SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Partrick Mwita Martinus v National Police Service Commission & 3 others [2018] KEELRC 551 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 551 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
551
Citation
[2018] KEELRC 551 (KLR)
Decided
23 November 2018
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypePetition for Declaration and InjunctionPostureRespondents filed preliminary objection, Court dismissed it.CoramBYRAM ONGAYA
Petitioner's suspension and dismissal were null and void, and he is reinstated.

Facts

Petitioner was suspended and dismissed from National Police Service on charges of plunder and negligence. He appealed but the dismissal was upheld. He filed a petition seeking declaration, injunction, reinstatement, damages and costs.

Issues

  • Validity of disciplinary proceedings and dismissal
  • Right to appeal own decision
  • Procedural fairness

Reasoning

Court found no orderly room proceedings took place, and dismissed the appeal as untimely. Procedural fairness was not violated.

Outcome

Judgment for Petitioner

Orders

  • Declaration of nullity of proceedings and dismissal
  • Permanent injunction against respondents
  • Reinstatement of petitioner
  • Payment of back salaries and allowances
  • Costs awarded to petitioner

Remedies

  • Declaration
  • Injunction
  • Reinstatement
  • Compensation
  • Costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • National Police Service Act, 2011
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case