Download PDF
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Representation</span></u></b><u><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">:<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">C.H. Azuine (Mrs.) for the Claimant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">J.C. Ibe (Mrs), Assistant Director Civil Litigation, Imo State Ministry of Justice, for the Defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-ansi-language: EN-US"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 2.5in; text-align: justify;"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">On 23<sup>rd</sup> day of August 2013, the claimant filed a complaint and claimed against the Defendants jointly and severally as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration that the claimant is still a Permanent Secretary in the service of the Imo State Government and is entitled to the salaries, emoluments, benefits and privileges till 1<sup>st</sup> March, 2018.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration that the claimant is only due for retirement on 1<sup>st</sup> March 2018 when he would have attained 60 years of age.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">3.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration that the purported retirement of the claimant from the Imo State Civil Service by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant (vide letter dated 30<sup>th</sup> May, 2013 reference number CSC/P.9/S.9/IV/101 issued by the chairman of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant) is null and void and of no effect.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">4.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An order setting aside the purported retirement of the claimant from Imo State Civil Service (vide letter dated 30<sup>th</sup> May, 2013 reference number CSC/P.9/S.9/IV/101 issued by the chairman of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant.)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">5.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An order reinstating the claimant as a Permanent Secretary in the Imo State Civil Service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">6.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An order restoring the payment of salaries, emoluments, allowances, benefits and privileges to the claimant by the defendants from May 2013.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">7.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An Injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and or agents from retiring the claimant from the Imo State Civil Service before 1<sup>st</sup> March, 2018. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">The complaint was filed alongside pleadings and other processes which were served on the defendant. The defendants entered appearance vide a motion for extension of time on 31<sup>st</sup> January 2014, and subsequently on 19<sup>th</sup> March 2014, vide a motion for extension of time, filed a Statement of Defence, the Defendant’s witness written<a name="_GoBack"></a> statement on oath, List of witness and documents. After preliminary applications were taken and resolved; hearing commenced on 23<sup>rd</sup> April 2015. The Claimant testified for himself as CW1. The Defendant called one witness Samuel Chinedum Ezeji a Chief Administrative Officer in the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant. Hearing was concluded on 14<sup>th</sup> March, 2016, and parties were ordered to file their final written addresses in accordance with the rules of this court. The Claimant’s address was filed on 21<sup>st</sup> April 2016. The defendants’ final written address was filed on the 23<sup>rd</sup> day of May 2016 vide a motion for extension of time. Parties adopted their respective Final written addresses on 27<sup>th</sup> May, 2016. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In the claimant’s final address filed on 21<sup>st</sup> April 2016, counsel identified one issue for determination as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">Whether the claimant having not attained the age of 60 years or thirty-five years of service can be prematurely and compulsorily retired from the Imo State Civil Service by the defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In arguing this issue, counsel stated that the claimant is a public officer and cited <b>ACHU vs. CSC CROSS RIVERS STATE (2009) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1129) 498</b> in support of his statement. Counsel argued further that it has been admitted by the parties that the claimant is a civil servant in the employ of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant which is a creation of the Nigerian Constitution with powers to appoint, dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over persons holding offices in the Imo State Civil service. It is counsel’s further argument that the claimant’s employment has statutory flavour as his contract of service is governed by the Imo State Civil Service Rules See <b>PHCN PLC vs. OFFOELO (2013) 4 NWLR (Pt 1344) 417 paras B-F </b>and<b> NAWA vs. A. G. CROSS RIVERS STATE (2007) LPELR 8294 (CA).</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">It is the submission of Counsel that by virtue of section 31 of the Imo State Civil Service Commission Regulations 1984, the claimant is due for retirement upon attaining the age of 60 or 35 years in service. Counsel submitted further that while DW1 admitted that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant had the power to hire and fire the claimant; he failed to state the law providing for such power. Again, counsel is of the opinion that since the claimant’s employment is statutory, the defendants cannot determine it without recourse to the statutory regulations governing his employment, non-observance to any of such rules as in the present case renders such purported retirement a nullity. See the following cases of: <b>AKINYANJU vs. UNILORIN (2011) All FWLR (Pt. 569) 1080 at 1147-48 and LONGE vs. FBN (2010) 6 NWLR (Pt 1189) 1.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">It is counsel’s argument at this juncture that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant lacks the power to remove the claimant from office without following due process, stated in the Civil Service Rules. See <b>NAWA vs. A.G. CROSS RIVERS STATE (Supra)</b>. The claimant tendered the letter that purported to retire him from service. Counsel contended that though the said letter emanated from the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant; it conveyed the decision of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant. Therefore, it was the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant that unlawfully purportedly retired the claimant without the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant’s input contrary to section 202 of the 1999 Constitution that provides for the independence of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant from any authority including the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant. see <b>CSC IMO STATE vs. GODWIN ONYEMA ANUFOROM (unreported) Appeal No: CA/PH/191/2003</b> delivered on 12/12/2006. Similarly, counsel argued that when a legislation has specified functions or duties for a specific body to carry out, it is only that body that can discharge such duties to the exclusion of other bodies not contemplated or mentioned in the statute. Anything to the contrary, would be illegal. See <b>LADEJOBI vs. ODUTOLA HOLDING LTD (2002) NWLR (Pt. 753) 212.</b> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Also, this letter did not disclose the cause for retiring the claimant. The defendant at trial failed to establish just cause for the purported retirement. Counsel cited the case of <b>OLUFEAGBA vs. ABDULRAHEEM (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1173) 462-64</b> where it was held that in a statutory employment, the reason for termination is crucial to both parties’ case. The reason must be ascertainable and in accordance with the letter of appointment, governing regulations and statutory provisions. Drawing from the foregoing, counsel submitted that the purported retirement is unlawful and unconstitutional because no evidence was given to show compliance with the Civil Service Rules. The 1<sup>st</sup> defendant is not permitted to act contrary to law, the claimant having been appointed by the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant does not hold his tenure of office at the pleasure of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Furthermore, counsel submitted that the claimant was retired prematurely. According to the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary 7<sup>th</sup> Edition, the word premature means “happening before the normal or expected time”. It is counsel’s submission that the claimant was born on 1/3/1958 and was employed on 1/9/1984 by the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant. The claimant was 55 years old and had worked for 29 years at the time he was purportedly retired by the defendants which is clearly below the statutory requirement, thus null and void. See <b>PHCN vs. OFFOELO (supra) at 409</b>. Counsel urged the court to hold that the claimant was prematurely retired from office and reinstate him back to his position with its attendant rights, benefits and privileges and in line with the decisions in <b>OLANIYAN vs. UNILAG (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 599 </b>and<b> KWARA POLY vs. OYEBANJI (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 447) 141 at 199</b>. In conclusion, counsel prayed the court to grant the reliefs sought by the claimant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In the defendants’ final address, filed on 23/5/2016 vide a motion for extension of time, counsel raised one issue for determination thus: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">Whether the claimant is rightly retired and entitled to the reliefs sought. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Counsel argued that the claimant was appointed Permanent Secretary by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, retired by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant through the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant and is not entitled to any of his claims. Counsel argued further that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant has the discretion to appoint and remove any person holding any office under Section 208 of the Constitution. The removal of such person is an executive act which is not actionable in court. The office is not one which the civil service commission can elevate a person to by promotion. Counsel submitted that section 208(4) makes the position of Permanent Secretary a political office which appointment is not based on merit. The office of permanent secretary is not regulated by the Civil Service Rules. Also, Section 11(B) of the Interpretation Act vests power in the Governor to appoint or remove the claimant being a person appointed under section 208. Counsel contended that the powers vested in the Governor are mandatory because the word “shall” is used. See <b>OGIDI vs. THE STATE (2005) 5 NWLR (Pt. 918) 286 at 327</b>, See also section 208 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). Counsel submitted that such powers may be validly delegated to the 3<sup>rd</sup> or 4<sup>th</sup> defendant and such action is not caught by the Latin maxim of <i>delegatus non potest delegare</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">It is the further submission of Counsel that this court cannot validly reinstate the claimant as permanent secretary because such order would be incapable of enforcement. More so, counsel is of the opinion that with regard to the above mentioned constitutional provisions, the claimant’s suit as presently constituted is not justiciable and the court is robbed of jurisdiction to entertain it. Counsel relied on the case of <b>CALABAR CENTRAL COOPERATIVE THRIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD vs. EKPO (2008) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1083) 362</b> and submitted that the court’s duty in the face of clear provisions of a statute or Constitution is to interpret same with more. See also the cases of:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-language:HE">1.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">TOTAL NIG PLC vs. AKINPELU (2004) 17 NWLR (Pt. 903) 509 at 527-28<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-language:HE">2.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">BEWAJI vs OBASANJO (2008) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1093) 540<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In conclusion, counsel urged the Court to hold that the claimant was appropriately retired from office as permanent Secretary and dismiss the claimant’s suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 2in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><b><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Court’s Decision<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The facts of the claimant’s case, as narrated by him in his evidence as CW1, are that he was employed by the Secondary Education Management Board as a graduate teacher on 1/9/1984 and his service was later on transferred to the Imo State Civil Service on 16/1/1992 as principal Superintendent of Press. His appointment was confirmed vide letter dated 2/12/1994 effective 1/9/1986. Through promotions, he rose to the rank of Director of Printing Services/Government Printer on 1<sup>st</sup> February 2005. By a letter dated 3/7/2007 from the office of the 4<sup>th</sup> defendant, his appointment by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant as Permanent Secretary was conveyed to him. The claimant averred that he was born on 1/3/1958 and he will be 60 years of age in 2018. His condition of service in the Imo State Civil Service is governed by the Public Service rules. By the Public Service Rules, Pension Act and other laws, he is due for retirement in 2018 when he would be 60 years. However the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant prematurely and compulsorily retired him from the Civil Service without regard to the Public Service Rules vide the letter dated 30/5/2013. The letter was signed on behalf of the chairman of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant by one E.A Iheka, the acting permanent secretary. The letter did not state the reason for the compulsory retirement nor did it disclose that the retirement was done by the appropriate authority. The claimant also made the following assertions about his retirement: His employment has statutory flavour and he has not reached retirement age at the time he was retired; he has been in service for only 28 years as at the date of his compulsory retirement against the mandatory 35 years; the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant did not comply with the PSR before retiring him from service neither does the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant or the 4<sup>th</sup> defendant have the power to retire him; the retirement was not the decision of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant; no reason was given for his retirement and no allegation of misconduct was leveled against him; his dismissal is in violation of the PSR and there is no legal justification for same; the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant acted in excess of his powers when he retired the claimant. The claimant tendered in support of his case, his letter of transfer to Imo State Civil Service, confirmation letter, letter of appointment as permanent secretary, declaration of age and letter of retirement from service. These are in evidence as Exhibits A, B, C, D and E respectively. Under cross examination by the defendants counsel, the claimant maintained that he was wrongfully retired from service. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendant’s only witness, who described himself as the Chief Administrative Officer of the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant, adopted the witness statement on oath which he made on 19<sup>th</sup> March 2014. DW1 did not say anything meaningful in his deposition. He treated his deposition as if it is a statement of defence and went about admitting or denying paragraphs of the claimant’s statement of facts without giving any evidence of the position of the defendant in respect of the claimant’s allegations. The only thing I can make out from the deposition of DW1 is that he said when the claimant accepted his appointment as permanent secretary, his condition of service changed and that the claimant was retired by the same authority who appointed him. DW1 also referred to some letters which he tendered in evidence and marked Exhibits F and G. Under cross examination by the senior Counsel for the claimant, DW1 said Exhibits F and G were written by the 4<sup>th</sup> defendant on the instruction of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant. The letters were sent to the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant and the Imo Broadcasting Corporation. DW1 also said he has not seen the record of the claimant and does not know if the claimant has served 35 years or attained 60 years of age before he was retired. DW1 has also not seen the claimant’s retirement letter but in Exhibit F, no reason was given to the Civil Service Commission for the retirement of the claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Having heard learned counsels to the parties in their final written addresses and having examined the facts of this case, it is my view that the sole issue to be determined in this suit is: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Whether the claimant has proved his case as to entitle him to the reliefs he sought.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">From the facts of this case, it is not in dispute that the claimant was a civil servant in the Imo State Civil Service and in July 2007. He was appointed by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant as a Permanent Secretary in the Imo State Civil Service. On 30<sup>th</sup> May 2013, he was retired from service. The claimant’s case is that he had not yet reached retirement age when he was retired from service and that 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who retired him from service has no such power to retire him. The defendants’ position, as can be pieced together from the scanty statement defence and deposition of DW1, is that the claimant’s appointment as permanent secretary changed his condition of service and his retirement was lawful as it was done by the appropriate authority. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The first duty in resolving the issue is to find who retired the claimant and whether the person has power to retire the claimant. This appears to be the contest in this case. The cause of this action is the retirement of the claimant from service vide the letter dated 30<sup>th</sup> May 2013 and signed by one A.E. Iheka, acting permanent secretary for the Chairman of the Imo State Civil Service Commission. The letter is in evidence as Exhibit E. The claimant was informed in paragraph 1 of the retirement letter as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“<b><i>I am directed to refer to letter no. SGI/S.0011/S.2/T.1/91 dated 28<sup>th</sup> May 2013 from the Secretary to the Government of Imo State on the above mentioned subject matter and convey the <u>directives</u> <u>of His Excellency, the Executive Governor of Imo State, Owelle Rochas Anayo Okorocha (OON)</u> <u>to retire you</u> <u>from the Imo State Civil Service with effect from Friday 24<sup>th</sup> May 2013.</u></i></b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">It is clear from the content of Exhibit E reproduced above that the claimant was retired from service by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant but the 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant was instructed to convey the retirement to the claimant which it did vide the exhibit. Exhibit F was tendered by DW1. The exhibit is a letter dated 28<sup>th</sup> May 2013 with reference number <b><i>SGI/S.0011/S.2/T.1/91. </i></b>It was signed by one E.I. Igaro, the Permanent Secretary, Economic Affairs Bureau, office of the Secretary to the Government of Imo State and addressed to the Chairman of the Imo State Civil Service Commission. Upon reading the exhibit in conjunction with Exhibit E, it became clear to me that Exhibit E was issued to the claimant pursuant to Exhibit F. The reason is this: In Exhibit F, the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission from whose office Exhibit E was issued to the claimant was informed as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“RE: IMMEDIATE RETIREMENT OF PERMANENT SECRETARIES.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">I am directed to refer to the recent press release on the above subject matter (copy attached) and humbly request you to issue appropriate letters to the following permanent secretaries <u>who were retired</u> <u>by His Excellency</u>, the Governor of Imo State, Owelle Rochas Okorocha (OON). They are:<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">1.<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">J. I. Amafili.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">2.<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">----<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">3.<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">…”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In Exhibit F, the Chairman of the Imo State Civil Service Commission was informed that some permanent secretaries, including the claimant, have been retired by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant and he was to issue letters to that effect to the affected permanent secretaries. The claimant’s retirement letter was issued to him subsequently. It is clear that the action directed or ordered by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, as disclosed in the content of Exhibits E and F, was the retirement of the claimant from the Imo State Civil Service. The letters did not mention the removal from office as permanent secretary. Without any doubt, the claimant was retired from the Imo State Civil Service and the retirement was taken and directed by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant. The fundamental question arising from this fact is: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Can the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, the Governor of Imo State, retire a civil servant from the Imo State Civil Service?</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendants counsel has argued very forcefully in his written address that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant retired the claimant from service pursuant to the powers of appointment and removal of permanent secretaries conferred on the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant in section 208 of the Constitution. The defendants Counsel also argued in paragraphs 4.11 and 4.16 of his address that the exercise by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant of that power, cannot be justiciable and this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this suit. Before I examine the powers of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant under Section 208 of the Constitution, let me quickly comment on the submission of the defendant’s counsel that the retirement of the claimant by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant is not justiciable. By a notice of preliminary objection dated 28<sup>th</sup> January 2014 and argued on 25<sup>th</sup> February 2014, the defendants urged this court to dismiss this suit on the grounds, among others, that-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">i.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The subject matter of the suit is not a matter within the jurisdiction of <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">this court pursuant to Section 208 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The suit borders of retirement of the claimant as permanent secretary <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">and it is not actionable in a court of law.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">iii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The subject matter of the suit, that is appointment of the claimant as <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">permanent secretary by the Governor, is not a matter within the jurisdiction of this court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In my ruling given on 19<sup>th</sup> March 2014, I dismissed the Preliminary Objection while I held that the retirement of the claimant by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant is justiciable and the subject matter comes within the jurisdiction of this court. I am surprised the defendants counsel is raising the same arguments again in his final written address. Counsel may, perhaps, be indulging himself for want of anything else to write. If that is not the case, then I wonder whether counsel is abreast of basic principles of law. The issue having been raised and determined by this court, issue estoppel has been created on the issue. It cannot be decided twice in the same proceedings between the same parties. Furthermore, will it not amount to sitting on appeal over my own ruling should I proceed on these issues again? It definitely will amount to doing so. The defendants counsel should note that what he sought, very wittingly I must say, to achieve by his address is not allowed in law. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 208 of the Constitution relied on by the defendants counsel as the authority of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant to retire the claimant provides:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“(1) Power to <u>appoint</u> persons to hold or act in the offices to which this section applies and to <u>remove</u> persons so appointed <u>from any such office</u> shall vest in the Governor of the State. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> (2) The offices to which this section applies are, namely-<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(a) Secretary to the Government of the State; <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(b) Head of the Civil Service of the State; <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(c) <u>Permanent Secretary</u> or other chief executive in any Ministry or Department of the Government of the State howsoever designated; and <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(d) any office on the personal staff of the Governor.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(3) An appointment to the office of the Head of the Civil Service of a State shall not be made except from among Permanent Secretaries or equivalent rank in the civil service of any State or of the Federation. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(4) In exercising his powers of appointment under this section, the Governor shall have regard to the diversity of the people within the State and the need to promote national unity. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(5) Any appointment made pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (d) of subsection (2) of this section shall be at the pleasure of the Governor and shall cease when the Governor ceases to hold office: <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Provided that where a person has been appointed from a public service of the Federation or a State, he shall be entitled to return to the public service of the Federation or of the State when the Governor ceases to hold office.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><i><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 208 (1) and (2) c) empowers state Governors to appoint persons into office of permanent secretary and also power to <b><i><u>remove</u> persons so appointed <u>from any such office</u></i></b>. It is clear from the provision that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who appointed the claimant as a permanent secretary can also remove the claimant from the same office. However, what happened in this case, as shown in the retirement letter, was not a removal from office of permanent secretary but a retirement from the civil service. It can then be asked whether the appointment of a person as permanent secretary convert him from being civil servant as pleaded by the defendant in paragraph 2 of the statement of defence. I think not. The claimant’s letter of appointment as a permanent secretary is in evidence as Exhibit C. It is dated 3<sup>rd</sup> July 2007 and was written by the Secretary to the Government of Imo State. The 1<sup>st</sup> paragraph thereof, which is relevant to the issue under consideration, reads-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> <b><u>APPOINTMENT AS PERMANENT SECRETARY <o:p></o:p></u></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“His Excellency, the Governor of Imo State, Chief Ikedi Godson Ohakim (Ochinanwata) has approved your <u>appointment a permanent secretary in the Imo State Civil Service.”</u><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">I have underlined the words “<b><i>appointment a permanent secretary in the Imo State Civil Service.”</i></b> to emphasise the facts that the claimant’s appointment as a permanent secretary did not take him away from the Civil Service or change his status as a civil servant. The appointment was still an appointment in the Imo State Civil Service. Secondly, the proviso to subsection 5 of the section stipulates that where a person has been appointed from a public service of the Federation or a State, he shall be entitled to return to the public service of the Federation or of the State when the Governor ceases to hold office. By this provision, it is clear that the person appointed as permanent sectary, at all times while he held the office, remained in the Civil service.<b><i> </i></b>The bottom line is that the claimant was still in the Imo State Civil service while he held the office of permanent secretary.<b><i> </i></b>Therefore, the power of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant under Section 208 of the Constitution to remove a permanent secretary appointed by him does not extend to removal of the permanent secretary from the civil service altogether. In the result, Section 208 (1) did not cover or sanction the action of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant in the retirement of the claimant from the Imo State Civil Service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Other than Section 208 of the Constitution, the defendants have not been able to point this court to any other law which permits the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant to retire civil servants from service without recourse to the Civil service Rules. Let me also mention that nothing in the provision of Section 208 of the 1999 constitution suggests that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant has power to retire a permanent secretary from the civil service without recourse to Civil Service Commission or the Civil Service Rules. Being a civil servant, the claimant employment is regulated by the Civil Service Rules or regulation made pursuant to the provisions of Section 197 of the 1999 Constitution. It is now trite that employment under the Civil Service Rules is employment protected by statutes. See <b>ATTORNEY-GENERAL, CROSS RIVER STATE vs. OKON (2007) All FWLR (Pt. 395) 370; OKEME vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, EDO STATE (2001) FWLR (Pt.36) 873; OMIDIORA vs. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 415) 1807. </b>Therefore, the claimant’s employment in the Imo State Civil Service had statutory flavour. This fact was constitutionally recognized when it was provided thus in Section 208 (5) of the 1999 Constitution:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“Any appointment made pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (d) of subsection (2) of this section shall be at the pleasure of the Governor and shall cease when the Governor ceases to hold office: <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5in 135.75pt"><b><i><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;tab-stops: .5in 135.75pt"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Provided that where a person has been appointed from a public service of the Federation or a State, he shall be entitled to return to the public service of the Federation or of the State when the Governor ceases to hold office.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">By this provision, the appointment of the Head of Service of the State and Permanent Secretary, having been appointed from the public service of the state, are not at the pleasure of the Governor. These appointments do not cease when the governor ceases to hold office but the officers are entitled to return to the Civil service when the Governor ceases to hold office. It is thus clear that if for whatever reason the claimant is removed from office as Permanent Secretary by the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, he should be returned to the public service of Imo State. Being a Civil servant all the while the claimant held office as permanent secretary, the Constitution has further settled the issue of which authority has the responsibility to discipline him. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 197 (1) of the 1999 Constitution provide that </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“There shall be established for each State of the Federation the following bodies, namely- <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:55.5pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -19.5pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(a)<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">State Civil Service Commission<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:55.5pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -19.5pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(b)<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">----------<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 2 (1) and (2) of part II of the Third Schedule 1999 Constitution provide:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-indent:.5in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">2. Civil Service Commission of a State <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-15.3pt"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(1)The Commission shall have power, without prejudice to the powers vested in the Governor and the State Judicial Service Commission, to- <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(a) appoint persons to offices in the State civil service; and <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(b) dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over persons holding such offices. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-15.75pt"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The Commission shall not exercise any of its powers under sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph in respect of such offices of heads of divisions of Ministries or of departments of the Government of the State as may from time to time be designated by an order made by the Governor except after consultation with the head of the civil service of the State.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Then, Section 202 of the 1999 Constitution provides as follows:</span><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-align: justify;"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">"In exercising its power to make appointments or to exercise disciplinary control over persons the State Civil Service Commission, the State Independent Electoral Commission and the State Judicial Service Commission shall not be subject to the direction and control of any other authority or person."<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The combined effect of the above provisions of the constitution is that the matter of discipline, or dismissal or retirement of the claimant from the Imo State Civil services is the responsibility of the Imo State Civil Service Commission and this responsibility is not subject to the direction and control of any authority or person. Although Section 208 (1) gave power to the Governor to appoint persons to hold or act in the offices to which the section apply and to remove persons so appointed from any such office, the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant cannot, while removing the claimant as permanent secretary, retire him altogether from the civil service. As a civil servant whose appointment is not at the pleasure of the Governor, the legislation regulating the appointment and removal or retirement from service is found in the Civil Service Rules. In this case, it was the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who retired the claimant and not the Civil Service Commission. Although the retirement letter was written by the Commission, it only conveyed to the claimant the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant’s decision to retire him from service. It is therefore obvious that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant does not have power to retire a civil servant without recourse to the Civil Service Commission or the Civil Service Rules. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In <b>NAWA vs. ATTORNEY GENERAL, CROSS RIVER STATE </b></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(2007) LPELR -8294 (CA</span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">)</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">, a case whose facts are not too dissimilar from this instant case, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">the Court of Appeal, per </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">JEAN OMOKRI, J.C.A</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> held as follows:</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: 2.25pt"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">"Though the Governor of a state has the power to appoint Civil Servants, he cannot remove such civil servant without following due process stated in the civil service rules and regulations. If the Governor wants to retire a civil servant for a just cause, then he must make a recommendation to that effect to the Civil Service Commission of the State which will do so in compliance with the law. Clearly, it is not the intention of the legislator that under section 208(1) of the 1999 Constitution, a Governor can just retire a permanent secretary without any just cause.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">His Lordship further held: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“In a democratic government where the rule of law prevails, a civil servant cannot be retired at will without complying with the Civil Service Rules and Regulations having Constitutional force and backing. See sections 197, 202 and Part II paragraph 2(2) of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution. Presently, it is the duty of the Court to safeguard the rights and liberties of the individual and to protect him from any abuse or misuse of power.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The words of His Lordship represent the position of the law on this issue. See also the case of <b>ATTORNEY-GENERAL, CROSS RIVER STATE vs. OKON (supra) </b>which is also on all fours with the facts of this case. I must add that if the claimant is to be retired compulsorily from the civil service of Imo State, then it must be done in accordance with the Civil Service Rules and Regulations. Beside the facts that it is the Civil service commission who has the responsibility to compulsorily retire or even dismiss the claimant from service for genuine reasons, such compulsory retirement or dismissal must be on the basis of disciplinary action for an offence or misconduct. The compulsory retirement imposed on the claimant in this case suggests that he was being disciplined for the commission of any crime or misconduct. However, there was no evidence that he committed any crime, offence or misconduct for which he was compulsorily retired. Even the claimant’s retirement letter did not mention that the claimant was retired from service for any alleged misconduct. The letter merely conveyed the retirement to the claimant. In effect, the claimant was compulsorily retired from service for no reason at all. Definitely, not on disciplinary ground. Without any doubt, the claimant’s retirement from service leaves much to be desired. Consequently, I find that the claimant’s retirement was not done by the proper authority. The 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who retired the claimant has no power to compulsorily retire a civil servant from the Imo State Civil Service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 31 of the Imo State Civil Service Commission Regulations 1984 provides that: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">"A civil servant shall retire compulsorily on attainment of sixty years of age or thirty-five years of service, whichever is earlier. Six months before attaining the age of sixty years or thirty-five years of service, the staff shall give notice of retirement from the service. This is to ensure smooth hand-over/taking over and early processing of the retirement benefits. In all cases a civil servant in whatever grade shall be deemed to have retired from the service from the date he attains sixty years of age or thirty-five years of service". <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The claimant averred that he was born on 1/3/1958 and will attain the age of 60 years in 2018 when he will be expected to retire from service going by the provisions of the Public Service Rules. He is also averred he was only 28 years in service when he was retired. A consideration of these averments reveal that by age, the claimant has till 1<sup>st</sup> March 2018 to retire and going by years of service, the claimant has 7 more years of service. The claimant’s earliest retirement date is 1<sup>st</sup> March 2018 when he will be 60 years. The defendant has not disputed the fact that the claimant was retired before his retirement age. I have also found that the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant has no power to retire a permanent secretary or any civil servant for that matter under section 208 of 1999 constitution. Obviously, the claimant was not retired in accordance with the civil service rules and regulations and neither was the proper procedure for the compulsory retirement of the appellant followed in this matter. The claimant is a civil servant, therefore, he cannot be retired at the pleasure of the Governor or without compliance with the Imo State Civil Service Rules and Regulations which governed his appointment. See </span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">NAWA vs. ATTORNEY GENERAL, CROSS RIVER STATE </span></b><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(supra) </span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">and<b> </b></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ATTORNEY-GENERAL, CROSS RIVER STATE V. OKON (supra)</span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Since the defendants did not comply with the procedure provided by the civil service rules and regulations of the Imo State 1984, their action in the purported retirement of the claimant is a null and void and the retirement of the claimant is set aside. Consequently, reliefs (ii), (iii), (iv), (vi) and (vii) sought by the claimant are granted. In reliefs (i) and (ii), the claimant has sought a declaration that he is still a permanent secretary and an order </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">reinstating him as a Permanent Secretary in the Imo State Civil Service. As observed earlier, it is the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who can make the appointment of permanent secretary and remove the person from same office. Although the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant cannot remove or retire the claimant from the Civil Service, the action of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant is deemed as a removal of the claimant from the office of permanent secretary. It is my view that this court cannot insist on the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant retaining the claimant as a permanent secretary. In the circumstance, it is appropriate to fall back to the provision of Section 208 (5) which provides that the claimant returns to the Civil Service.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> Reliefs (i) and (v) are accordingly refused and dismissed.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In addition to the reliefs granted, the court makes the following orders:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">i.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The claimant is re-instated into the Imo State Civil Service effective <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">from 30<sup>th</sup> May 2013 and he is to be placed in the position he is expected to be on returning into the Civil service from the position of permanent Secretary.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendants are ordered to pay the claimant all his </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">salaries, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">emoluments, allowances, benefits and privileges accruing to him from May 2013.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">iii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendants, their servants or agents are </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">restrained from <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">retiring the claimant from the Imo State Civil Service before his retirement date of 1<sup>st</sup> March, 2018.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">I also award cost of <b><s>N</s>100,000.00</b> in favour of the claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE">Judgment is entered accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language:HE">Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE">Judge</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>