[2016] KEHC 6773 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was not given a fair hearing before the 1st Respondent made decisions affecting his interests in the specified land parcels. The right to be heard is a fundamental principle of natural justice and administrative law. Since the respondents consented to the application, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 6773 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Isaiah Miriti; Respondent: Igembe District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Joseph Mwenda Malebe; Respondent: Joseph Ntumburi; Respondent: Stephen Mwiti; Respondent: Justus Murerwa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 100 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave for Judicial Review and Stay Orders
- Outcome
- Application allowed by consent.
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Land Adjudication, Right to Fair Hearing, Prohibition Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Isaiah Miriti
Applicant
Igembe District Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Joseph Mwenda Malebe
Respondent
Joseph Ntumburi
Respondent
Stephen Mwiti
Respondent
Justus Murerwa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Leave for Judicial Review and Stay Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Respondent determined objections without affording the applicant a fair hearing.
- 2 Whether leave should be granted to apply for a writ of prohibition against implementation of the impugned decisions.
- 3 Whether leave should operate as a stay of implementation of the decisions.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was not given a fair hearing before the 1st Respondent made decisions affecting his interests in the specified land parcels. The right to be heard is a fundamental principle of natural justice and administrative law. Since the respondents consented to the application, the court allowed the application for leave to apply for judicial review and ordered that such leave operate as a stay of implementation of the impugned decisions. The court's decision was grounded on the breach of the applicant's right to a fair hearing and the absence of opposition from the respondents.
Court Disposition
Application allowed by consent.
Orders
- Leave granted to the applicant to apply for a writ of prohibition against implementation of the 1st Respondent's decisions in objections 829/97 A,B,C and E over land parcels 3436, 3455, 3719 and 3707 at Amwathi Maua Adjudication Section.
- Leave so granted to operate as a stay of implementation of the said decisions.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
MISC. APPLICATION NO 100 OF 2009
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR A JUDICIAL REVIEW WRIT OF PROHIBITION
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE LAW REFORM ACT, CAP 26 LAWS OF KENYA AND ORDER LIII THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES
AND
IN THE MATTER OF IMPLEMENTATION OF A DECISION IN OBJECTIONS NOS 829/97 A,B,C, AND E OVER LAND PARCEL NOS 3436,3455,3719 AND 3707 SITUATED AT AMWATHI MAUA ADJUDICATION SECTION
BETWEEN
ISAIAH MIRITI …....................................................EX-PARTE APPLICATION
VERSUS
IGEMBE DISTRICT LAND ADJUDICATION AND
SETTLEMEMT OFFICER.....................................................1ST RESPONDENT
ATTORNEY GENERAL …...................................................2ND RESPONDENT
AND
JOSEPH MWENDA MALEBE..................................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
JOSEPH NTUMBURI................................................ 2ND INTERESTED PARTY
STEPHEN MWITI.......................................................3RD INTERESTED PARTY
JUSTUS MURERWA ….............................................4TH INTERESTED PARTY
R U L I N G
This application is dated 22nd day of December, 2009 and seeks orders:-
THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to certify this application extremely urgent and hear it on priority basis in the first instance.
THATthe Honourable Court be pleased to grant the ex-parte applicant leave to apply for a Judicial Review writ of Prohibition prohibiting implementation of the decisions of the 1st Respondent made in objection 829/97 A,B, C and E over land parcel No 3436, 3455, 3719 and 3707 situated at Amwathi Maua Adjudication Section.
THATthe Honourable Court be pleased to order that leave so granted do operate as a stay of implementation of the decisions made by the 1st Respondent in objection 829/97 A,B,C and E over Land parcel No. 3436, 3455, 3719 and 3707 situated in Amwathi Maua Adjudication Section.
It is supported by the Supporting Affidavit of Isahiah Miriti, the exparte application and the following grounds:-
THATthe 1st Respondent heard and determined the afore mentioned objections without giving the ex-parte applicant who was the objector a chance to be heard.
THATthe 1st Respondent's decisions were arrived at arbitrarily without giving the ex-parte applicant a fair hearing.
THATthe 1st Respondent has given a notice dated 17/12/2009 to the ex-parte applicant that the implementation of the decision is scheduled for 22. 12. 2009.
On 16th February, 2016, the parties, by Consent, agreed to have the application allowed.
In the circumstances, the application is allowed.
Delivered in open Court at Meru this 16th day of February, 2016 in the presence of:-
CC : Lilian/Daniel
Kariuki for the Exparte Applicant
Ojiambo for 1st and 2nd Interested Parties.
Kimathi for 1st and 2nd Respondents
P.M. NJOROGE
JUDGE