Biwott v County Public Service Board Baringo County & another (Constitutional Petition E010 of 2022) [2022] KEELRC 1360 (KLR) (29 July 2022) (Ruling)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 1360
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 1360 (KLR)
- Decided
- 29 July 2022
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeInterlocutory ApplicationPostureInterlocutory ApplicationCoramNJ ABUODHA
Holding
The Court grants the interlocutory order pending the hearing and determination of the Petition.
Facts
The Petitioner, Isaiah Biwott, sought a temporary conservatory order restraining the County Public Service Board Baringo County and the County Government of Baringo from considering, deliberating, short listing, interviewing, selecting and appointing any persons for over six hundred (600) staff positions published in an advertisement in the Daily Nation Newspaper.
Issues
- Constitutional violation of Articles 2, 10, 21, 22, 23, 43, 174, 176, 190, 201, 232, 235, and 258 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010
- Violation of Fiscal Responsibility Principles by the County Government of Baringo
- Violation of Article 176(2) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010
Reasoning
The Court grants the interlocutory order due to the constitutional values and public interest in protecting public finance from misallocation and use.
Outcome
Interlocutory Order Granted
Orders
- Pending the hearing and determination of the Petition, the court issues a temporary conservatory order restraining the 1st respondent from considering, deliberating, short listing, interviewing, selecting and appointing any persons for over six hundred (600) staff positions published in an advertisement in the Daily Nation Newspaper.
Authorities cited
Legislation (4)
- Constitution of Kenya 2010
- County Government Act 2012
- Public Finance Management Act 2012
- Public Finance Management (County Government) Regulations 2015
Cases cited (1)
- Gatirau Munay v Dickson Mwenda Kithinku & 2 Others [2014] 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.
Loading judgment…