[2022] KEHC 1081 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 1081 (KLR)

The court found that the Petitioner had already been removed from the chairmanship prior to filing the petition, rendering the prayer for conservatory orders moot. The court further determined that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate any violation of his constitutional rights, as the 9th and 10th Respondents acted...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 1081 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Paul Chirchir; Respondent: Haron Rotich; Respondent: Collins Biegon; Respondent: Albert Kipkoech; Respondent: Hezron Ngetich; Respondent: Gilbert Ngetich; Respondent: Sammy Rono; Respondent: Philip Rono; Respondent: Erick Korir; Respondent: The Speaker, County Assembly of Kericho; Respondent: The Clerk, County Assembly of Kericho
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition E006 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petition dismissed
Judges
AN Ongeri
Legal Topics
Fair Administrative Action, Right to Fair Hearing, Removal From Public Office, County Government Procedure
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Fair Administrative Action Right to Fair Hearing Removal From Public Office County Government Procedure

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Chirchir

Applicant

Haron Rotich

Respondent

Collins Biegon

Respondent

Albert Kipkoech

Respondent

Hezron Ngetich

Respondent

Gilbert Ngetich

Respondent

Sammy Rono

Respondent

Philip Rono

Respondent

Erick Korir

Respondent

The Speaker, County Assembly of Kericho

Respondent

The Clerk, County Assembly of Kericho

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Petitioner is entitled to conservatory orders restraining removal from the chairmanship of the Public Works, Roads and Transport Committee.
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner’s constitutional rights under Articles 27 and 41 were violated by the Respondents.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Petitioner had already been removed from the chairmanship prior to filing the petition, rendering the prayer for conservatory orders moot. The court further determined that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate any violation of his constitutional rights, as the 9th and 10th Respondents acted in accordance with the County Assembly Standing Orders, and notices for the meeting were properly issued and approved. There was no evidence that the procedures breached the Constitution or that the Petitioner was denied a fair hearing. Consequently, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed. On costs, the court exercised its discretion for each party to bear its own costs,...

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • The petition is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.