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

Cyprian Ochieng Fedha v Principal Secretary, Ministry of Education, the State Department of Vocational & Technical Training & 2 others [2021] KEELRC 1393 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 1393 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
1393
Citation
[2021] KEELRC 1393 (KLR)
Decided
1 July 2021
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

The Court found that the Petition was not properly before the Court due to lack of an employment nexus, but the Petition was not rejected based on lack of precision in drafting. The Court agreed with the Petitioner that the engagement of the retired trainers did not meet the constitutional expectations of transparency, competition, and merit.

Facts

The Petitioner alleged that the recall of retired trainers from national polytechnics and technical colleges was unconstitutional and without legal basis. The Petitioner sought a declaration that the actions of the Respondents were against public policy, the Constitution, and the relevant statute, and that the 3rd Respondent breached Article 156.

Issues

  • Whether the Petitioner's rights have been violated and whether the Petitioner has the locus to bring this suit?
  • Whether the reappointment was lawful?
  • Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the remedies sought?

Reasoning

The Court considered the Petition, affidavits, and submissions, and found that the recall of retired trainers was not done through public participation and competitive recruitment, and did not meet the constitutional expectations of transparency, competition, and merit.

Outcome

The Court granted one of the substantive orders sought by the Petitioner, ordering a declaration that the decision to restrict re-engagement of retired trainers to only those who had retired in 2015 was against the values and principles underpinning the public service.

Orders

  • A declaration be and is hereby issued that the decision of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents to restrict re-engagement of retired trainers to only those who had retired in 2015 were against values and principles underpinning the public service.
⚠ 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