[2014] KEELRC 10 (KLR)

[2014] KEELRC 10 (KLR)

The court held that the claimant, as a public officer, was entitled under the Public Service Commission of Kenya Discipline Manual 2008 to receive house, medical, and other allowances during suspension. The respondent's failure to pay the claimant any salary or allowances since the date of suspension was in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEELRC 10 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Ahmed Sheikh Mohammed; Respondent: Garissa Water & Sewerage Company
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 447 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Notice of Motion
Outcome
Application partially allowed.
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Suspension Without Pay, Disciplinary Procedure, Public Service Regulations
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Suspension Without Pay Disciplinary Procedure Public Service Regulations

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Sheikh Mohammed

Applicant

Garissa Water & Sewerage Company

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Application / Interlocutory Ruling on Notice of Motion

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be restrained from recruiting to fill the claimant's position during suspension.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to salary and allowances during the period of suspension.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's suspension of the claimant without pay contravened applicable regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the claimant, as a public officer, was entitled under the Public Service Commission of Kenya Discipline Manual 2008 to receive house, medical, and other allowances during suspension. The respondent's failure to pay the claimant any salary or allowances since the date of suspension was in contravention of these regulations. The court directed that the claimant be paid half salary from the date of suspension until he is either cleared or dismissed by the Board. The court further found that there was no bar to the respondent engaging an interim auditor, provided the Board permitted such an appointment. The substantive claim would be determined at a later stage, and costs...

Court Disposition

Application partially allowed.

Orders

  • The claimant shall be paid half salary from the date of suspension until he is either cleared or dismissed by the Board of the respondent.
  • The respondent is not barred from engaging the services of an interim auditor provided the Board permits such appointment.