augustin lyatonga mrema vs attorney general 2000 tzhc 24 8 december 2000

IN TK3 HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAS J S J S A LAAM. MISC. CIVIL C A U S E NO. Vl OF 1999 applicant AUGUSTIN LYATONOA MRSMA ......................... VERSUS .,„.T .... r e s p o n d e n t THE HON. ATTORNEY G b J'u Uw '-j r u l i NJ*. M anento-J a * applicant had f i l e d an a p p lica tio n b efore thisOcurt fo r . v f o - the nreroiyo.tive o r d e r , o f c e t io r a r i and ma n d a » « . ^ leave to apply 1 -i-sih Ju ly 1999* a p p li- -l f c a b d ic a t io n was heard and dism issed on 13*h cant th r o w * h is learned co u se l, Hr, K W : i i n s . He f i l e d a c h ^ e r a? p lic a t io n ^ d e r the p r o v i s i o n s o f S ection 5 ( 1 ) ( c) o f the A p p e ll* ° J u ris d ic tio n A ct, 1979 lo r grant to t, i L L t leave to appeal to the Court o f ^ " e l T ca tio n i s supported by an a f fid a v it doponed by .<r. ^ a , ^ , ^ fo r the a p p lica n t. » . A t * n « r General f i l e d a counter a f fid a v it and the learned Cousels were, by th e ir consent, ordered i e w ritten s c i s s i o n s in support o f the a p p lic a tio n . learne cou se! fo r the applicant was ordered to f i l e the w ritxer on or b efore 9 /6 /2 0 0 0 , the Attorney General to f i l e m s su ^ - 0 * “ “ or b efore 20/ 6/2000 and re jo in d e r i f any to be f i l e d on or oe or„ 30/ 6 / 2 )00. 9 » ru lin g was ordered to be on n otice to the p a r t ie s . ^ today, n eith er the applicant nor the respondents f i l e d ^ w ritten submissions* I have decided to write the ru lin g a - ns th - a f fid a v it and counter a f fid a v it s on ly . It be noted ~na °n ~ day fo r the order fo r w ritten s c i s s i o n was «ade, * . s W ^ was h eld hy one Hingia, learned counsel while the respondent '-a . r.p re santed by Kgwembe, learned State a ttorn ey. ^ -x ,,-p M-r Nvenr-s. learned counsel fo r t-he By reading tne a m a c -/i'- o. iir. a p p lica n t, I dont see any l e Sa l p oin t ra ised co be determined by i - e c lu r t o f Appeal. Burin,, the h e a r t s o f the a p p lica tio n which was 2 d is m is s e d , th e le a r n e d s t a t e a t t o r n e y had r a is e d a p r e lim in a r y o b je c t io n i n t h a t th e a p p lic a n t s v;as to a p p e a l to th e C ourt o f A pp eal on d e c is io n s made b y t h i s C ourt (Msumi J .K ) and n o t to a p p ly f o r j u d i c i a l r e v ie w . That j u d i c i a l re v ie w sh o u ld be th e l a s t a l t e r n a t i v e in th e e v e n t th e r e a re no aven u es open to th e a p p l ic a n t . He was th e r e fo r e to p ursue h i s l e g a l r i g h t s i f any b y way o f a p p e a l. In tl:e ab sen ce o f any su b m issio n s in su p p o rt o f th e a f f i d a v i t , puhaps e x p la in in g f u r t h e r i f th e r e a re any re a s o n s p e rh a p s n o t p r o j^ - iy c o v e r e d i n th e a f f i d a v i t , I arn o b lig e d to a g ree w ith th e le a r n e d s t a t e a tto r n e y i n h i s c o u n te r a f f i d a v i t t h a t th e r e a re no l e g a l p o in t s r a i s e d w hich n eed be d eterm in ed by th e C ourt o f A p p e a l. The a p p l ic a t io n f o r Jae p*rant o f le a v e to a p p e a l to cho C ourt o f iip p ea l i s t h e r e 201 e d isn iio se d f o r la c k o f lim its a t a l l . A. S . Henento JUDGE 8/1 2/2000 8/1 2/2000 Corani z ** 1'fejiento Jo Shayo/Nyangc f o r the A p p lic a n t Abniit - f o r th e Respondent Manumbu Mrs. O rder: The r u li n g i s re a d in c o u r t i n the- ab su re o f r e s p , w ith n o tic e . A. R . Mrmengo JUDGE o / l 2/2 3 0 0 B