[2025] KEELRC 379 (KLR)
The court is unable to issue a final award to the petitioner due to the absence of the necessary payslip documentation, which is required to quantify the award. The responsibility for providing the payslips lies with the respondents, and their failure to do so has caused the delay in finalizing the matter. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEELRC 379 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Patrick Munyao Maingi; Respondent: The Hon Attorney General; Respondent: The Inspector General Of Police; Respondent: The Commissioner Of Police; Respondent: The National Police Service Commission; Respondent: The Public Service Commission
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 108 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Final Award Scheduling; Awaiting Further Documentation
- Outcome
- Final award deferred; matter mentioned for further directions.
- Judges
- AN Mwaure
- Legal Topics
- Public Service Employment, Salary Disputes, Court Procedure, Judicial Technology
- 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
Patrick Munyao Maingi
Applicant
The Hon Attorney General
Respondent
The Inspector General Of Police
Respondent
The Commissioner Of Police
Respondent
The National Police Service Commission
Respondent
The Public Service Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Final Award Scheduling; Awaiting Further Documentation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to a final award pending submission of payslips.
- 2 Whether the delay in providing payslips by the respondents is justified.
- 3 Whether the court can proceed to finalize the award in the absence of the required documentation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court is unable to issue a final award to the petitioner due to the absence of the necessary payslip documentation, which is required to quantify the award. The responsibility for providing the payslips lies with the respondents, and their failure to do so has caused the delay in finalizing the matter. The court, therefore, schedules a mention for the parties to explain the prolonged non-compliance. The court also emphasizes the use of technology and the avoidance of undue technicalities in the delivery of justice, in line with constitutional and statutory mandates, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Court Disposition
Final award deferred; matter mentioned for further directions.
Orders
- The case will be mentioned on February 26, 2026 for parties to explain to the court why they have not provided the payslips.
- A signed copy of the ruling will be availed to each party upon payment of court fees.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Maingi v Attorney General & 4 others (Petition 108 of 2017) [2025] KEELRC 379 (KLR) (13 February 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEELRC 379 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Petition 108 of 2017
AN Mwaure, J
February 13, 2025
Between
Patrick Munyao Maingi
Petitioner
and
The Hon Attorney General
1st Respondent
The Inspector General Of Police
2nd Respondent
The Commissioner Of Police
3rd Respondent
The National Police Service Commission
4th Respondent
The Public Service Commission
5th Respondent
Ruling
1. This matter was scheduled to give a final award to the Petitioner.
2. The court has been waiting for the payslip in order to finalise the award.
3. The case will be mentioned on February 26, 2026 for parties to explain to the court why they do not provide the payslips all these months.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025. ANNA NGIBUINI MWAUREJUDGEOrderIn view of the declaration of measures restricting Court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by His Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020 and subsequent directions of 21st April 2020 that judgments and rulings shall be delivered through video conferencing or via email. They have waived compliance with Order 21 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires that all judgments and rulings be pronounced in open Court. In permitting this course, this Court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the Court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 1B of the Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this Court the duty of the Court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes.A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of Court fees.ANNA NGIBUINI MWAUREJUDGE