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

Stella Ndunge Kimatu v Teachers Service Commission [2020] KEELRC 1184 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 1184 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1184
Citation
[2020] KEELRC 1184 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureAppeal from an original trial decisionCoramGithinji, Ndolo, Rika
Holding

The promotion of the claimant to the position of Graduate Teacher was regular and lawful. The reversal of her promotions back to her P1 Teacher (Primary Teacher II) position was irregular, unfair, and amounted to a demotion.

Facts

Claimant Stella Ndunge Kimatu was a teacher employed by the Respondent Teachers Service Commission. She was promoted to Graduate Teacher II, then to Senior Teacher I, and later her promotions were reversed to Primary Teacher II.

Issues

  1. Whether the promotions were regular and lawful
  2. Whether reversing the promotions was irregular, unfair and unlawful and equal to a demotion
  3. Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought

Reasoning

The promotion to Graduate Teacher II was confirmed by the respondent and was regular and lawful. The reversal of promotions was found to be irregular and unfair, constituting a demotion.

Outcome

Claimant's reliefs granted

Orders

  • An order permanently restraining the respondent, its officers, agents, employees, or any other person from implementing, proceeding with, or acting on the respondent's decision demoting and reducing/cutting/slashing the claimant's salary and other allowances

Remedies

  • Reinstatement to the position of Senior Teacher 1, Job Group L with all the salary, allowances and benefits applicable thereto

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Article 47(1) of the Constitution of Kenya
Cases cited (1)
  • Judicial Service Commission vs Mbalu Mutava & Another [2015] eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case