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

Lonyala & 28 others v Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Physical Planning & 3 others; County Government of West Pokot & 6 others (Interested Parties) (Constitutional Petition E002 of 2023) [2025] KEHC 8399 (KLR) (12 June 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEHC 8399 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
8399
Citation
[2025] KEHC 8399 (KLR)
Decided
12 June 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeConstitutional PetitionPostureAppeal from the High Court at KapenguriaCoramRPV WENDOH
Holding

The petition is hereby stayed pending the determination of Mombasa ELC Petition 33/2021.

Facts

The petitioners sought an order compelling the Director of Survey to demarcate and clearly mark the boundaries of West Pokot in relation to neighboring counties. The petition was stayed pending the determination of a similar case in the Environment and Land Court.

Issues

  1. Demarcation of boundaries of Kenya's 47 counties
  2. Implementation of Articles 94(3) and 188 of the Constitution

Reasoning

The court agreed with the petitioners and the Attorney General that since the court in Mombasa is already seized of the matter, it is proper that this court awaits the determination in the said case.

Outcome

Stay of the petition pending the determination of Mombasa ELC Petition 33/2021

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Articles 94(3) and 188 of the Constitution
  • Articles 129, 130, 131(1)(b) and 2(a) and (b) as read together with Articles 6(1) and the first schedule to the Constitution
Cases cited (1)
  • Mombasa ELC Petition 33/2021 Okiya Omtata Okoiti -V- The Parliament of Kenya, The National Executive of Kenya, the Attorney General and four interested parties
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