[2013] KEHC 3951 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent, Minister for Lands, acted outside his legal mandate by interfering with and purporting to revoke the applicant's land title, a power reserved exclusively for the High Court. The respondent's actions in allocating the disputed land portions to the interested party, without...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 3951 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ngiri Ikua; Respondent: Minister for Lands; Interested Party: Dominic Mike Kaminja; Interested Party: The Land Registrar Mbeere District
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 28 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion
- Outcome
- Application allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition Orders, Ultra Vires Actions, Land Title Revocation
- 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
Ngiri Ikua
Applicant
Minister for Lands
Respondent
Dominic Mike Kaminja
Interested Party
The Land Registrar Mbeere District
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent acted ultra vires in interfering with the decision of the District Commissioner in objection No. 430/1980.
- 2 Whether the respondent had legal authority to revoke or interfere with the applicant's land title.
- 3 Whether the respondent's actions were unfair, unreasonable, biased, or illegal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent, Minister for Lands, acted outside his legal mandate by interfering with and purporting to revoke the applicant's land title, a power reserved exclusively for the High Court. The respondent's actions in allocating the disputed land portions to the interested party, without providing reasons and in contravention of the District Commissioner's earlier decision, were ultra vires, unfair, unreasonable, and illegal. The court relied on the principle that only the court can revoke title, and any such administrative interference is null and void. Consequently, the court granted the orders of certiorari and prohibition sought by the applicant.
Court Disposition
Application allowed.
Orders
- An order of certiorari is issued quashing the decision of the respondent dated 30th August 2011 in Appeal No. 35 of 1989.
- An order of certiorari is issued quashing the decision of the respondent dated 30th August 2011 in Appeal No. 35 of 1989 depriving the applicant of his property.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Embu
Miscellaneous Application 28 of 2012 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif]
NGIRI IKUA ...........…......................................................……..APPLICANT
VERSUS
MINISTER FOR LANDS........................................................RESPONDENT
DOMINIC MIKE KAMINJA.......................................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
THE LAND REGISTRAR MBEERE DISTRICT...........2ND INTERESTED PARTY
R U L I N G
This is the Notice of Motion dated 16/10/2012 where the exparte applicant is seeking the following orders:-
An order of certiorari be issued bringing into this Court and quashing the decision of the Respondent dated 30th August 2011 in Appeal No. 35 of 1989.
An order of certiorari be issued bringing into this Court and quashing the decision of the Respondent dated 30th August 2011 in Appeal No. 35 of 19890 depriving the applicant of his property without a reasonable cause.
An order of prohibition, prohibiting the Land Registrar Mbeere District from registering the disputed portions of land to wit; 363, 380, 381, 410, 279, 382, 383, 378, 377 & 364 to the interested party herein.
The application is supported by the grounds set out in the statutory statement dated 27/2/2012 and verifying affidavit of Augostino Ndaru Muitanjau. The main ground being that the Respondent in Appeal No. 35/89 interfered with the decision of the District Commissioner dated 21/8/87 in objection No. 430/1980. And that he gave no reason for such interference.
As a result of the interference he allocated portions of land viz – 363, 364, 377 – 383, 410 to the interested party. These actions of the Respondent were ultra vires, unfair unreasonable biased and illegal. The Attorney General on behalf of the Respondent and 2nd interested party i.e. Minister for Lands and Land Registrar Mbeere District respectively submitted that the actions of the Respondent was ultra vires.
The reason being that there was interference with Title and that the purported revocation of the exparte party is only a preserve of the High Court. No Government agent has power to revoke title as this falls within the jurisdiction of the Court.
The Attorney General has put it so well in the submissions to the Court. The Respondent acted outside his mandate. I allow the exparte applicant's Notice of Motion dated 16/10/2012. Each party to bear his own costs.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT EMBU THIS 17TH DAY OF APRIL 2013.
H.I. ONG’UDI
J U D G E
In the presence of:-
Mr. Kamunda for Applicant
Njue CC
[if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; line-height:115%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif";} </style> <![endif]