JUDGMENT 1. The claimant is a Nigerian Police Sergeant with force No. 243652. He brought this suit before this Honourable court against the defendants via a general form of complaint dated 22nd March 2018 and filed 17th April 2018. Vide paragraph 21 of the statement of facts, the claimant is praying for: 1. A declaration that the claimant is still under full employment of the 1st defendant and he is entitled to all his salaries and benefits since his recruitment by the 1st defendant in 2002 till date. 2. A declaration that the act of non-payment of the claimant’s salary by the 1st and 2nd defendants since January 2007 till now is unlawful, illegal and a breach of the claimant’s rights and the law. 3. A declaration that the purported dismissed of the claimant is illegal, null and void ab initio 4. An order of this Honourable court directing/compelling the defendants to immediately reinstate the claimant to his position with his rank and status as it would have been now if he were not dismissed. 5. An order of this Honourable court directing/compelling the defendants to immediately pay salaries to the claimant with the accumulated arrears thereof from January 2007 to March 2018 6. Five hundred million naira (N500,000,000:00) general and aggravated damages for untold hardship, psychological trauma, and destitution suffered by the claimant as a result of the defendants’ actions. 7. The cost of action as shall be assessed by the court. 2. The complaint was accompanied with statement of facts, witness statement on oath, list of witnesses, list of documents to be relied on at the trial and photo copies of document to be tendered in evidence,. 3. A part from the 4th defendant, the 1st 2nd and 3rd defendants refused and neglected to file memorandum of appearance and statement of defence. The 4th defendant after filing memorandum of conditional appearance filed motion on notice for striking out the name of 4th defendant from this suit on the ground of non-disclosure of cause of action. The name of 4th defendant was vide order of court stuck out of the suit, leaving only the 1st 2nd and 3rd defendants to defend the suit. 4. This suit was fought by the clamant alone without opposition, as the defendants failed and neglected to enter appearance and file defence to the claim of the claimant. 5. The case of the claimant is that he was recruited by the 1st defendant in November 2002 and after successful training at 1st defendant’s training college in Kaduna in April 2003, he was posted to Kebbi State Command of the 1st defendant and resume duty at Kangiwa Division of the Command where he served. After serving for two years in Kebbi State Command, the Claimant was in July 2005 posted to Ogun State Command. Upon resumption of duty in Ogun State Command, the claimant was posted to Ibapo Division of the Command, where he resumed duties. 6. In January 2007, the claimant went to his salary pay point at his former command in Kebbi State to collect his December 2006 Salary and the pay Master told him that his salary had been stopped because there was a general audit conducted by the 1st defendant which the claimant did not participate in. The claimant was then advised to go to the Headquarters of the 1st defendant in Abuja to sort the issue out. It was averred by the claimant that at the time the audit was carried out he was no longer in Kebbi Command, he was serving at Ogun State Command and he did his audit screening in Ogun State Command. 7. The claimant averred that he heeded to the advice given to him, he went to the Headquarters of the 1st defendant at Abuja severally, and at every point he was being told that the error will be rectified, but nothing was done in that respect till date. When all his visits could not yield result the claimant on 30/9/2009, wrote letter appealing for the payment of his withheld salaries, but the said letter was never given any attention. 8. It was averred that in year 2010, the claimant was sent of promotion course by the 1st defendant and on successful completion of the course, he was promoted to the rank of a corporal. 9. It was averred that two other letters were written to the 2nd defendant in 2014 and 2015, respectively, with the hope that the claimant’s plight would be looked into by the authority but nothing was done about the matter. 10. It was also averred that while the issue of salary of the claimant salary remained unresolved, the claimant was sent by the 1st defendant to another promotion course and on successful completion of the course he was promoted to the rank of Sergeant. 11. The claimant stated that while he was always going to the office of the 2nd defendant in an effort to resolve the issue of his salary, some officers within the 1st defendant headquarters in Abuja told him that he had been dismissed from service on the ground that he presented a double/fake WAEC certificate to the 1st defendant at the 1st defendant’s training college. The allegation of presenting fake certificate was refuted and disproved by the claimant. It was averred that this unfounded allegation introduced a new dimension of confusion to the whole scenario as to what is really responsible for the stoppage of the claimant’s salary and who is indeed responsible for the ordeal that he has been passing through as an officer of the 1st defendant. The claimant averred that the stoppage of his salary has put him through untold hardship, trauma and pitiable condition. 12. The claimant also averred that he never defaulted in the course of his service and has never been charged for any offence or misconduct throughout his career as an officer of the Nigerian Police Force. He stated as at March 2018 the 1st defendant owed the claimant 135 Months salaries which total Five Million Seven Hundred and Ninety Two Thousand Four Hundred Nara (N5,792,400.00). 13. The claimant opened his case on 31/10/2018 and concluded giving evidence in chief on 15/11/2018 and the case was adjourned to 14/1/2019 for the defendants to cross-examined CW1. On 14/1/2019, when this matter came up before the court for cross examination the defendants were not in court and were not represented despite being served with hearing notices for the sitting of the court, the defendants were foreclosed from cross-examining CW1 and the witness was discharged. The case was then adjourned to the 20/2/2019 for defence. On 20/2/2019 when this matter came up for defence counsel for the fourth defendant appeared and raised preliminary objection.. On 9/5/2019, the claimant applied to discontinue against 4th defendant. In the absence of objection the name of 4th defendant was struck out from the suit for having been discontinued against it by the claimant. The motion on notice raising objection was also withdrawn by counsel for the 4th defendant and same was struck out accordingly. On 14/10/2019 this suit came up before the court for defence but the defendants were absent and not represented in court. Consequently, the defendants were foreclosed and counsel for the claimant asked to file final written address and the case adjourned to 9/12/2019 for adoption of final written addresses. 14. THE SUBMISSION OF THE CLAIMANT. 15. The claimant formulated a sole issue for determination, to wit: “Whether having regard to the circumstances of this suit and the evidence both oral and documentary elicited, the claimant has on the balance of probabilities proved his case and is therefore entitled to the claims made in this suit” 16. In arguing the sole issue for determination, Olusola Ojo, Esq; counsel for the claimant began his submission by contending that the claimant has discharged the burden of proof imposed on him by the law and he is entitled to all the reliefs sought. It is argued by counsel that the claimant in this suit deserved judgment and by the attitude of the defendant who have shown no respect to the court despite several hearing notices served on them. Counsel contended that the defendants would not be prejudice, if judgment is entered in favour of the claimant. Counsel urged the court to enter judgment in favor of the claimant in accordance with Order 8 Rules 5 (1) of the Rules of this honourable court which states, ‘that where a defendant or respondent fails to file a memorandum of appearance within the stipulated time or fails to file appropriate process in defense of the action, the court may proceed to hear the matter and give judgment’. 17. It is the contention of counsel that it is on record that the court has heard the matter and the only duty left is to enter judgment. According to counsel the defendants have been given ample opportunities to defend the matter and have failed to do so. It is further contended that the rules of court are to be obeyed as enunciated in the case of OLOMO V APE (2014) 12 WRN 116. The court held thus, 18. It is an established principle of law that rules of court are to be obeyed and complied with, where they are breached or not complied with without any explanation as in the present case, it cannot be overlooked or swept under the carpet in favour of the party in breach. The defendants have breached and also refused to comply with the rules of this court, the court should therefore not overlook this breach or non-compliance. 19. It is further argued by counsel that all the averments of the claimant in this suit were not challenged. It is trite law that the court is to act on evidence in a proceeding not challenged. On this submission counsel relied on the case of YUSUF v OMOKANYE (2013) 11 WRN 112, where on effect of unchallenged evidence in proceedings, the court held thus, ‘’The general principle of law is that where evidence given by a party to any proceedings is not challenged by the adverse party who had the opportunity to do so, such evidence is deemed admitted and the court seized of the proceedings is entitled to act on the unchallenged evidence before it. See also the case of MATANMI V DADA (2013) 31 WRN 1 SC 20. In concluding his submission, counsel is of the belief that the defendants have no defense in this matter and that has been the reason why they stayed away from the matter. The claimant has discharged the burden of prove both orally and by the exhibits tendered to be entitled to all the reliefs sought in this case. Counsel urged the court to so hold and to enter judgment in favour of the claimant. COURT’S DECISION. 21. I have carefully and painstakingly considered the claimant’s originating processes and the oral and written submission of counsel for the claimants. 22. It is pertinent to note at the onset that the defendants in this suit decided not to honour the court processes in respect of this suit served on them, failing to file memorandum of appearance and statement of defence. This means that the court does not have the benefit of knowing the defendants’ sides of the story as it relates to the claim of the claimant. However, this does not mean that the defendants are entitled to judgment. The law still requires the claimant to meet up with minimal proof for him to be entitled to judgment. The rule, by the minimal evidential requirement, is that a claimant cannot assume that he is entitled to automatic judgment just because the other party did not adduce evidence before the trial court as held in Mr. Lawrence Azenabor v. Bayero University, Kano  25 NLLR (Pt. 70) 45 CA at 69 and Ogunyade v. Oshunkeye  4 NWLR (Pt. 1057) 218 SC at 247. See also this Court’s decision in Attorney General Osun State v. NLC & ors  34 NLLR (Pt. 99) 278 NIC. 23. Olusola Ojo, Esq; counsel for the claimant in oral adumbration before the court adopted the claimant’s final written address and contended that vide the documentary and oral evidence before the court, the claimant has proved his case and is entitled to judgment. 24. The claimant vide the reliefs before the court is praying for a declarations that he is still under full employment of the 1st defendant and he is entitled to all his salaries and benefits since his recruitment by the 1st defendant in 2002 till date, non-payment of the claimant’s salary by the 1st and 2nd defendants since January 2007 till now is unlawful, illegal and a breach of the claimant’s rights and the law and the purported dismissed of the claimant is illegal, null and void ab initio. The claimant is also praying for certain orders directing/compelling the defendants to immediately reinstate the claimant to his position with his rank and status as it would have been now if he were not dismissed, an order of this Honourable court directing/compelling the defendants to immediately pay salaries to the claimant with the accumulated arrears thereof from January 2007 to March 2018, Five hundred million naira (N500,000,000:00) general and aggravated damages for untold hardship, psychological trauma, and destitution suffered by the claimant as a result of the defendants’ actions and cost of action as shall be assessed by the court. 25. The claimant vide this suit want this court to declare him to be in the service of the defendants and payment of his arrears of salary from January 2007 to date. The claimant in proof of his case has told this court that he was enlisted into the Nigeria Police Force in November 2002 after successful completion of training at the Police Training College in Kaduna and was posted to serve at Kebbi Sate Command. He also told this Court that he served for two years at Kebbi State Command from where he was transferred to Ogun State. See exhibits CW1A1-2 and CW1B, respectively. 26. The claimant also told the court that he has been at his new Command in Ogun State where he had been serving till January 2007 when he went to his former Command in Kebbi State to collect his December Salary and he was told by the pay master that his salary had been removed due to audit screening conducted which he did not participate and he was advised to go to the Headquarters of the 1st Defendant to sort out the issue he acceded to the advice. In the process of pursuing his salary at the Headquarters of the 1st defendant he was told that the error would be rectified but that has not been done. When nothing was forth coming on 30/9/2009, he wrote letter pleading for his salary. See exhibit CW1D 27. The claimant stated while going to the office of the 2nd defendant in effort to resolve the issue of his unpaid salaries some officers within the office of the 2nd defendant told him that he had been dismissed on the ground that he presented a double/fake WAEC certificate to the 1st defendant at the 1st defendant’s training college which he promptly refuted the allegation and disproved it with evidence before the officers. See exhibit CW1I. 28. It was in evidence that the claimant in year 2010 participated in promotion exercise and the end of which he was promoted to the rank of a Corporal. See exhibit CW1E1-3. It is also in evidence that the claimant also participated in the promotion exercise Conducted by the 1st defendant in year 2015 and at the end of the exercise the clamant was promoted from the rank of Corporal to that of Sergeant. See exhibit CW1H1-3. The claimant in his quest of having to have his salary restored wrote two letters in year 2014 and year 2015, respectively. See exhibits CW1F1-4 and CW1G. 29. The claimant vide his reliefs is seeking for declaratory and injunctive reliefs. He is by law required to adduce sufficient, credible and compelling evidence in proof of his prayers as contained in the complaint and statement of facts. The Supreme Court has in the decision in the case of Gabriel Ativie v. Kabelmetal (Nig.) Ltd  LPELR-591(SC);  10 NWLR (Pt. 1095) 399;  5 - 6 SC (Pt. II) 47 that said that: ‘’A claim is circumscribed by the reliefs claimed. The duty of a Plaintiff therefore is to plead only such facts and materials as are necessary to sustain the reliefs and adduce evidence to prove same. He may, at the end of the day obtain all the reliefs claimed or less. He never gets more. Nor does he obtain reliefs not claimed. A court is therefore bound to grant only the reliefs claimed. It cannot grant reliefs not claimed.’’ 30. The claimant is vide his reliefs 1, 2 and 3, seeking for declarations that he is still under full employment of the 1st defendant, and is entitled to his salaries and benefits from January 2007 till date. A declaration that the act of non-payment of claimant’s salary by the 1st and 2nd defendants since January till now is unlawful, illegal and a breach of the claimant’s right and law. A declaration that his purported dismissal is illegal, null and void ab initio. The claimant seems to be relying on exhibits CW1A1-2, letter of transfer, CW1E1-3, letter of promotion to the rank of Corporal, CW1H1-3, letter of promotion from the rank of Corporal to Sergeant, CW1G, letter for reinstatement and CW1I, WAEC certificate. 31. I have reviewed the evidence of the claimant in his witness statement on oath it is manifestly clear that the claimant was enlisted into the Nigeria Police Force served at Kebbi State Command he was transferred from Kebbi Command to Ogun State Command vide exhibit CW1A1-2, letter of posting/transfer and Secondment dated 29th day July 2005. Upon resumption of duty at Ogun State Command the Claimant was posted to serve at Ibapo Division. See exhibit CW1C1-2. It is patently clear up to this period the claimant was serving in the Nigeria Police Force. But, in January 2007, he discovered that his salary had been stopped and upon enquiry he was told is because he did not participate in audit screening. Consequently, was advised to go to the Headquarters of 1st Defendant in Abuja to sort out the issue. However, all his effort to have his salary restored proved abortive. It was in the process of pursuing restoration of his salary that he was told he was dismissed for tendering fake certificate which he refuted. The claimant has in his pleading and witness statement averred that he had never defaulted in the course of performance if his duties and has never been charged for any offence or misconduct throughout his career as an officer of the Nigeria Police Force. 32. From the evidence before me there is nothing to show that the claimant has ever been queried or committed any act of misconduct to warrant his dismissal. Indeed, thus why there is no dismissal letter issued to the claimant by the defendant. The employment in the Nigeria Police Force is employment garnished with statutory flavor, for any Policeman to be dismissed, laid down procedure in the Police Act and Regulations made thereunder must be followed to the letter for such disciplinary action to be valid and lawful. The claimant having not been charged with any offence or tried for misconduct in orderly room trial, cannot be dismissed without formal hearing accorded to him. The action of the defendants conveyed orally to the claimants by officers of the 2nd defendants that he has been dismissed for submitting fake WAEC certificate is unlawful, null and void and of no effect whatsoever. In the circumstances, I found that the claimant is still in the service of the defendants, as his employment has not been determined in accordance with the law. 33. On reliefs 4, which is for an order directing/compelling the defendants to immediately reinstate the claimant to his position with his rank and status, the success of prayers 1, 2 and 3 means prayer 4 succeed as it depend on success of declaration. The defendants are hereby ordered to reinstate the claimant back to the service of the defendants with immediate effect. 34. On reliefs 5 and 6, being claims for salary and aggravated damages, these reliefs being sought clearly revealed claims of special damages which requires strict proof. The onus of proving claims for special damages is not an easy one, it is pretty onerous. In 7UP Bottling Company Plc v. Augustus  LPELR-20873(CA), for instance, it was held that a claim for gratuity, pension, housing fund, salary is a claim for special damages, which must be particularized and strictly proved. And by NNPC v. Clifco Nigeria Ltd  LPELR-2022(SC), what appears to be an admission cannot apply to a claim for special damages. Put in another way, a claim for special damages cannot succeed because it is admitted. Claim for special damages are never inferred from the nature of the act complained of. They do not follow in the ordinary course as is the case with general damages. They are exceptional and so must be claimed specially and proved strictly. The fact that it appears to be admitted does not relieve the party claiming it of the requirement of proof with compelling evidence. From these case law authorities, the fact that Defendants did not appear and file defence is not sufficient to be the proof of salaries. 35. The claimant is heavily relying on exhibits CW1D, letter of appeal for salary payment, CW1F1-4, letter of complaint on stoppage of salary. These exhibits cannot establish these claims as they did not show the quantum of the entitlement and how such quantum was arrived at. Furthermore, for a claim for special damages to succeed the claim must be particularized and proved specially. The exhibits before the court can only establish that the claimant has made demand for his salary. How much is the salary and how it was arrived this court was not told. The only mention made of the quantum was in paragraph 20 of the claim, which read:- ‘’The claimant avers that as at march 2018, the 1st defendant has owed him 135 months salaries which total Five Million Seven Hundred and Ninety Two Thousand Four Hundred Naira (N5,792,400).’’ 36. It is clear from the above quoted averment that the claimant has provided the total amount of his claim, but failed to particularize it to tell how much is his salary per month to enable the court knows how he arrived at the quantum more particularly when exhibits CW1E1-3 and CW1H1-3, clearly shows that the claimant was promoted twice within the period of claim. The reliefs for salary, general and aggravated damages are vague and uncertain and lacking in particulars and proof by evidence. See UNIVERSITY OF JOS V DR. M. C. IKEGWUOHA (2013) 9 NWLR (Pt.1360) 478. The claimant has failed to establish his claim for salaries and aggravated damages. These reliefs failed and are hereby dismissed. 37. Before ending this judgment I shall remarks that it is highly disturbing and astonishing to find that a law enforcement agent is being treated in the way and manner the clamant in this case was treated. This is an obnoxious way of treating a fellow employee. If there is any breach or infraction of service regulations what stops the defendants from bring such misconducts to the attention of the claimant and asking him to react or exculpate himself from blame. If that has been done and the claimant failed to do so, there is nothing preventing the long arm of the law from catching him. To unceremoniously stop an officer’s salary and allowed him to continue to work unpaid is sheer wickedness to fellow human being. 38. On the whole the clamant succeed only in parts of his claim as follows:- 1. A declaration is hereby granted that the claimant is still in the service of the defendant his employment having not been determined in accordance with the law. 2. An order is hereby made directing the defendants to reinstate the claimant back to the services of the Nigeria Police Force with immediate effect on his rank of Sergeant with all his entitlements. 3. The defendants should pay cost in the sum of N300,000.00 (Three Hundred Thousand Naira) only, to the claimant. 39. Judgment is entered accordingly. Sanusi Kado, Judge. REPRESENTATION: Olusola Ojo, Esq; for the claimant.