The National Industrial Court, Abuja, has ordered the National Examinations Council (NECO) to immediately reinstate two dismissed senior staff members, Mr Charles Berje and Dr Anthonia Utoh, to their positions on ground that the action was taken while the matter was before the court.
Delivering judgement yesterday, Justice O.Y. Anuwe held that in law, once a matter is in court, none of the parties is expected to take any further action or decision that would jeopardize the court process. She warned the examination body against undermining the authority of the court.
The court further held that the disciplinary process culminating in the decision that led to the termination of the claimants’ appointment was a clear disrespect for the court, since the matter was still pending in court.
The judge equally averred that since all parties submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the court, they are not allowed to do anything that may foist on the court a situation of hopelessness.
LEADERSHIP gathered that the affected NECO staff, Mr Charles Berje and Dr Anthonia Utoh, had through their counsel, Job Okebe, prayed in a motion to the court for an order of their reinstatement.
Their counsel also prayed the court for an order of mandatory injunction restraining the defendants from taking further steps in the matter, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
Though the claimants specifically asked the court to restrain the defendants (NECO) from dismissing them, joining all parties in the issue, the exam body went ahead to terminate the employment of the first and second claimants.
Recall that the court had in its earlier judgement, delivered on February 25, 2022, ordered NECO to strictly comply with the Public Service Rules by giving equal and fair opportunity to all eligible and qualified staff of the council, including the claimants, in the suit marked, NICN/MN/06/2021 to participate in the exercise.
The court, also in an earlier judgement, set aside the said promotion examination, which was held without the names of the claimants, whom it said were eligible for the examination but were unlawfully excluded.
However, while the substantive suit was in the process, the defendant went ahead and terminated the appointment of the 1st and 2nd claimants on ground of having absconded from their duty. The main suit has however been adjourned to October 24 for hearing.
