[2017] KEELC 3647 (KLR)

[2017] KEELC 3647 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had made reasonable efforts to obtain information regarding the creation of the subject land parcels but was unsuccessful. The applicant is entitled to access such information under Article 35 of the Constitution. The respondent, as a public office, is obligated to provide the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELC 3647 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jared Otieno Aridi; Respondent: District Adjudication and Settlement Officer Bondo and Rarieda
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 29 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Order of Mandamus
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Access to Information, Mandamus, Land Adjudication, Public Officer Duties
Source Language
en
Land and Property Administrative Law Access to Information Mandamus Land Adjudication Public Officer Duties

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jared Otieno Aridi

Applicant

District Adjudication and Settlement Officer Bondo and Rarieda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Order of Mandamus

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to information and documents relating to the creation of specified land parcels under Article 35 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent, as a public officer, is obligated to provide consent to sue and information as required by law.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's failure to provide information and consent is unreasonable and contrary to statutory and constitutional provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had made reasonable efforts to obtain information regarding the creation of the subject land parcels but was unsuccessful. The applicant is entitled to access such information under Article 35 of the Constitution. The respondent, as a public office, is obligated to provide the requested information and consent to sue, subject to payment of applicable fees. The respondent's failure to provide the information and consent was found to be unreasonable and contrary to both constitutional and statutory provisions. Consequently, the court granted the order of mandamus, directing the respondent to provide the applicant with certified copies of documents relating...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to provide the applicant with certified copies of documents relating to the creation of land parcels numbers 1683, 1685, and 2417/Nyamonye/Abidha village without unreasonable delay.
  • The respondent shall issue the applicant with consent to sue as provided under Section 30 of the Land Adjudication Act and/or Section 8 of the Land Consolidation Act within 30 days upon service of this order.