NA TZHC Dar es Salaam6 1

• ,;. ' IN 't'HF. J-JTGHr:ouwr OF 'T'AN7.ANTA AT DAR ER SAT!A~t:! CTVIT. CASE NO. 21R OF 1QQfi NEHEMIAH MUGARA . . . . . . . . PT,ATN'l'TFF VRRROR MEDICA.T. STORRS OF.PAR'T'MF.N'T' .. . ... OF.FF.NDAN'l' R U r~ I_N __ c:; T KAf.,BGEYA l J. This is a ruling 1n respect of preliminr1ry ohjer.tinnR rr1iRR<l by the plaintiff regarding the J oc:u:=; i=;t.;:inn i of t hf! A U·.orney General to represent the hefendant - Medir.Al RtnrRR TIPpArtment (herein-after to be referred to as MRO). ~~ The plaintiff, Nehemiah Mugasa, n~pre:=;ent.ed by Mr. Mr1geRn . Advocat~, is suing the Me<lic:al Store:=; OepnrtmAnt for terminnl benefits amounting to shR. 21,R11,100/=. RR:=;ponding to thiR clAim the Attorney General procAedP.d to draw 11p r1n<l f i J e A wr-i t.t·.An :=;tatement of defence on hehalf of thf! Defendant, Medic:r1l Rtnr~s Department, which act triggeren on the preRent preliminary object.ions. The plaintiff vehemently arg11es that the Attorney General cannot represent t.he <lF!f f;md;:mt. her.r111se .it. i R not. ;:t government department nor wr.1s plaintiff ;:t government emplnyPe. For clari.t.y, let us first put. far:t.s her'tr. 'T'he plaintiff wr.1s employed by the Government of the Unit.en Repuhl ic of 'T'amrnn i r1 r1ncl worked at Central Medical Stores within t:hR Ministry of Hertlth. By Act No. 13 of 1993, an autonomous OF!part.ment. ca] led Medical Stores Department was established. Rome of the workF!rs of the Central Medical stores (whi.ch was a i.:=rnol ved 11pnn the estahlishment of the Med.i Cr'tl Rton~s Oepr1rt.ment.) werf! ret.11rneo 1·0 the Ministry of Health while some were trtken over hy the Medir:r1] Stores Department. The p]aintiff wr.1R r.1mong those who were tr.1ken over by the new creature, the men i r:n l i::t·.nrei=: Department... r.1n<1 wRs ;:tppoint.ed ;:i Warehouse Att.enoant. Aft.F!r r1 yer1r of servi c:P. j n 1 ( ) _T • that capacity, to be precise, on ?.8\6\q5, thP pl~intiff WRR caught up in the retrenchment exercisP cRrriPd 011t hy thP Government in its various officPs and dP.pRrtments. HP wRR c:1,1Jy paid what was considered to be his full hPnPfit.s. UnimprP.si:-P.d hy this exercise plaintiff filed the presP.nt suit. "dem;;inrli ng pr1yment- of terminal benefits from the defendant as fnl]ows:- (a) Subsistance allowan~e 13,000x313x~=Rhs.R,13R,OOn ( b) For children 13000x31.3><?. =F~lli=:. 4, Ofi<) _. nno 2 ( c) For defendants (?) l._3, OO()_x_~JJ~_3 =RhR. fi_.103,!iOO 2 (d) 3 years (36 months) salr.1ry rP.i=:1111-. from rlP.fP.nrl,:1nl·'s decision to te~minate thP plaintiff frnm RP.rvice = sh.2,340,000 ( e) One month salary i.n J.i.P.ll of not.ice = RhR. n!i,000 (f) On transit allowance 7,000x3daysx7 = sh.147,000 (g) Freight ch~rges for plaintiff's personal. effect from Vombo Oovya to TRC (3 t.nns) = Rh.30,000 (h) Fare from Dar es Sal.aam t.o Nansio (Plai.nt.iff'R place nf Domicile) by rail 16ROOx5 = shs. 84,000 (i) Freight charges for plaintiff's personal effer.ts to he transported as parcel (3 tonR) = shs. 1qo,ooo (j) Hiring costs = RhR. 3()_.000 'T'ot.al Shs. ?.l,880.500 Refore filing the said suit however, Mr. Magesa, Advocate, sRnt a demand notice to the Director General., MP.di.cal RtnrP.R DApartment, who in turn contacted the Principal SAcretary, Ministry of \) Health. It would seem, t.he latt.Ar n11ly r.nnt.r1ct.P.<l t.hP JU.t·nt·nAy General who proceeded to prepare a Writt.P.n Statement nf ~efAnr.e followed by an appearance in c011rt. of a 81:at.e Attorney nn his behalf hence the ensuing object.inns. Mr. Magesa vigotously argued that the dAfAndant heing an autonomous body established by A~t 13 of 1q93, with its own Bnard ?, ( ) of Directors, has the right to defend thA suit on its own and can't be defended by the Attorney as it. iR not pRrt of the Government. He insisted that the writt.P.n str1t.ement of defAncP. having been filed by a wrong par.ty, t.hP. OP.f P.n<'lr1nt. should he t.alrnn to have failed to file one and th~refore plr1intiff is entitled t.n judgement in terms of 0.8, RulP. 14 of thP. r.i.vi J ProcAn11rA r.orlP.. In response, Mr. NgwAmhP., St:Rt.P. At t.ornP.y, .-=ir.gw~d that·. thA pla:i.nt if f was a. civil servr.1nt unoer t.hP. Ministry of HAR 1th.: 1" hat·. hA was r.P.t renched and p;i i.d r1l l hi. R dues, R nc~ t h;i t. t hA r-P. f nrA t· hP. Attorney General has a locus standi. WhP.n givAn chr1nce tn research on the matter, the State AttnrnP.y inst.P.Rd of rA- appear ing in court for f1.1rther or;d snhmi RR i.on f i 1 P.<1 r1 wr i. t.t·.P.11 submission in which he carried furthP.r his ar.gumAnt.s al n=rndy advanced. Mr. Ngwembe insisted that the defP.ndant is not a corporr1tR body which can sue or be sued but t.h;=it_ it. is a govArnmRnt Department within the Ministry of Health in terms of s. 1(1) of the 8stahlishment Act, Act 3\93; that it.R operations arA dependent on the approval of the Minister (R.4(2)(r1) ;:inrl (1.) of the Act); that the OepRrt.ment's funoi,ng,r1mnng other::;, iR made 11p of funds voted for by the Parliament. (R.1.1(1)(~) of the Act); that Government employees or those of pr1rastat.r1l Orgr1nisr1tionR can be transferred or seconded to the Depr1rtment (s.10 (4) of the Act); that the final appellate body is the Minister for RP.alth (S.12 of the Act) ~ho is also empowerP.d tn make RAgtJlatinns for the better giving effect to the Act (s.17). Mr. Ngwembe, State Attorney, charged in the r.1lt.Arnative that even if it were to be considered a legal P.nt.ity, hy virtue of being "within the Min i.stry" of Heal t.h pP.r s. 3 ( l ) of 1'.he ;:_ii:; Establishing Act, the Medical Stores nepartment deserveR to hP. defended by the Attorney General. He qtrnlifieo this hy pointing to annexur.e 11 0 11 t.o the plaint. which is t.akP.n hy p l,·=d n t. i ff to hP. r1 3 ( ) • I letter of appointment - hA says that as it lacks ner.eRRRry parti.r.111.;:irs which should form ;m appointmP.nt·. lP.t.t.Rr_. likP. sr1lr1ry, terms of employment i.e. permanent or temporary, whether pensionable or not, it should be t.AkAn to hR merely ;:i job description. Finally, Mr. Ngwemhe ~raye<l fnr leave to ;:imen~-thP. wd tten statement of d-ef enc A hy inc 1 trn i ng n~ levAnt <lor.urmmts which were not attacheo by his pr.edAcessor who authorP.d the written statement of Defence. Mr. Magesa, Advocate, for Plaintiff Also respon<le<l in writing but not without fuss. He bittery complained that one cannot start with an oral submissi.on And then embArk on written submissions and that this is an ahusP. of thP. court pror.P.ss. HR prayed that the submission should be st.ruck off. Jn the alternative, Mr. Magesa, argued that as the Attorney General has r.ome to t.he n.id of Oefendr1nt. thA issue is wl1P.thP.r· 0Af,=rncl;:rnl. is governm~nt Department or a government i.nstit11tion hence the argument that plaintiff was a governmAnt empJnyP.e iR irrelevant ... as the A-G has not come to Court in aid of plnintiff. Relying on Anh. A and B of the plaint Mr. MageRa inRiRted that i t was categorically stated that employees who wn11ld he taken over hy MSD would cease to be government employeeR and that therefore calling it (MSD) a government department i.s a contra<lir.tion in terms. In his further arguments, Mr. Magessa, observed that the Attorney General could come in to defend the MSD only if what was being challenged was the Minister's decision bt1t that this matter does not concern the Ministry of health. He concluded th".lt. if 1".he Ministry of Health decided to put the plainti.ff on tha list of retrenchees long after he had ceased heing its emplnyea it was its own problem having nothing to do with plaintiff's rightR. twill start with Mr. Magesa's r.omplai.nt regarding Mr. Ngwembe's act of filing a written submission instead of Appenring i.n cotirt to proceed with an oral suhmissinn. Jt. is true t·.h;:it nn leave was granted fot use of this avem,a hut. I haw~ ap;kP.n mysP.lf 4 ) ----·- ----- ----- whether Mr. Ngwembe's style occassioned Rny rlamRge or inj11st.ir.e to the other party. In my opinion there is none. Mr. Magesa's complaints would have heen just.if i.e<l :if no ch;:mr.e was given t.n him to respond. However the written suhmission wris r1vr1i1ed to him ' in re~ponse of which he also filed a writ.ten submission. Tn the circumstances, his argument. that. t.h is is r1 type of r1 ne f er.t. wh i r.h entitles this court to throw out Mr. Ngwembe's suhmisRion is untenable, for, what is important is not. the manner a s11hmi ss ion· is made but its substance. Now turning to the ma.in arguments_. T t.hink, for r.lr1rit.y, t.he Annexures to the plaint (A - O) on which the plaintiff hinges his ar.gumAnt.s, should he i:;ubst;:rnt. :i.a 11 y reprnd,1r.P.n, even .::, I·. t·.he <'lange r of making this ruling unnecessar.jly long. Uponestablishment of MSD, possih]y responding to workers inqueriis, the Ministry of He~lth responded to OTTU'R ]et~er hy writing letter Ref. RRA\150\I\Vol.I\ ..... dRted 5\8\Q4 (Annex11rA "A''} to Katibu wa OTTU, Tawi la 8ohari. ya Madawa, whnRe contents were as follows:- "Yah: MSIMAMO WA AJIRA KA.TIKA BOHART YA MADAWA Rejea ba.rua yako ya tarehe 4\A\1994 kuhusu sual a hi.Ji hapo juu (uliandika kwa lughR YR kiingereza). Nimeelekezwa h.ikutaar i fu kwa.mha k1rnnz ia tan'lhe 1 \ 7 \ 1 qq 4 Bohar i ya Madawa i.mewachukua wr1t.umi.Rh i wake (.i.livyowahitaji wenyewe} na kuwaajir.i. kwa mash.:Jrt.i yao (MSD}. Wat.um:i.shi wr.1l.iok11wP.po nrt amhao hawr1kuwahitr1jt wamerudish~a Wizarr1ni. Rivyo baRi kuanzi~ tarehe 1\7\1994 mliohakir1 Rohari yr1 MRdRwa si.yo watumishi. w;:1 Wi.1.ar.a t.eni'I. MwRj i_r.i. went1 ni Rohar.i ya Madawa na nd.lye Mamlaka sahihi ya k1.1mu11liza mambo yote kuhusu A,ttRA zenu kw.::, sas;:i hi vi . " On ?.At.h Sept.ember, 1. 994, the plaint.if f wr1s .:=tppo i ntArl a wa n'lh011se attendant of MSD vide lAtter Ref.No. CMS\PF\1144\~7 (Annexure "D"}. The body of the s;:ii.d 1.ett.er. nm,:; r1s fn11owR, 5 ) RE; .APPOINTMENT AS A WAREHOtJSP.! ATTRNOANT "I am pleased to inf or.m you t.hat. you lrnve hP.An appo i nt:P.cl to be a warehouse attendant: wit.hi n t.hP. f.o;::idJng ;rnd D'i spat.r.h Section as Incharge of dispatch A wi.t.h Affect from 1st October, 1994. ' As a wa:r.ehouse at t.endan-1: your dot. i es ;:ind reApons i. hi. l j t. i es will he ;::is follows: (a) Receiving J3 copies of CIHNS ano f!Vs for C11st.omP.rR ann I ' zonal Me~ical Stores from RalAs Rer.t.ion. (b) bistribt1t1on of 13 copies ann CVs t.o n:~spectivA groups for collection of drugs r.1n<l Hos pi_ t.a l i=::upp l. i es. ( ii.i) Recej_vihg drugs and hospitr1l suppl i P.!=; from respP.ct. i ve grolJps for. is_sue t.o cust.omFffS. (iv) Preparation of dispatch A documFmt.s. (v) Physical isuing of drugs and Hospi t.al suppl i.es to customers and Zonal Medi.cal Stores. (vi) Packing and t,o;;idi.ng Or11gs and Hospital supplies t.o customers and Zonal Medical Stores. · (vii) Accepting any other_duties as may be assigned by higher authorities. As the inch~rg~ of dis~at:.ch your immediate Manager wi.11 be the toadihg and dispatch Manager. Wishing yotl all the best. SGD: D. F.. WANZAGT Pf_:_BB_QNNF.l, MANAGF.R_~ The said letter was issued by MSO. For reasons undisclosed, the Ministry of Health, save for. l J Ann. "A", did not clarify the st.atus of Ex-central medic-:1l stores Employees arid rel.at.eel matters as vi.vi.dly di.splayeo in its further correspondehce with MSD as late as 1995 (AUtjtlst). in it~ l~tter ket .. -Htc.45~\1R4, dr1ted 23rd August, 1995, (Ann~B), the said Ministry wrote to the Director Genetal, MSD, a~.- follows, .'• .. :(. j "RE; RX-CENTRAt.. MRDtCAt STORRS RMPT.OYF.RS RMP.t,OYMF.N'l' STATUS AND PRRVtotJs TR~MTNAT, __ RRNRFITS ' .. ' t - • Please refer to y01ir. 1.ett.er. RAf. Nn.CMRr.\M\1 \Vol. TT\:l4() of 1.6th Atigust., 1995 regr1rding t.hP. AhovA mFmt.ionP.<1 ,,n,bjP.cl·.. . ' t would like to :i.hform you th;:1t F.x-F.mployees of t.he (;Frnt.n=il Medical Stores who have remained with the Medi~al Rtnres Depart~ent will be treated as follows:- ' (a) They w:i.11 all cease to he Government Employees with effect from 30\6\l994, r.tnd hAnCf'! t.hey shnuln he employed by Medical Stores nepArt.mAnt with effe~t fr·nm l.\7\l.994. (b} The terminal benefits of the employAes who were serving on Permanent and Pensionable terms will. he frozen and be paid by the Government after the retirement age.· ( C) Employees who are AArving on Operati.onal Rervi~e Terms will continue to cont.ri.hut.P. to NPF ;rnd the Ministry of J-tealth will t.ransf Ar their dor.ument.s in order to enable Medical RtnrAR nepartment tn liRse with Nt>F Hqn=1. kindly communj_cat.e with tis sn t.hat we r.;=m provi <'le you wi t.h the necessary NPF documents for your neceRs-'lry action. Yours Sincer.P.ly ,T. N. N;:rng'ung'ula for PRINCTPAT., RF.CRF.:TARV" Trea<ling on this letter, the Medical Rt.ores nep;nt.m~nt·. i i:;s11P.<l ;:i general notice to its workers. This notj r.e is d;:it.ed 2qth A11g11st .. 1995 and it is Ann. C to the plaint. Tt. nms as foll.ows:- ) TANGAZO "Kw;::i Waf any;::ika:d, Wot.e .. Bohari ya Madawa. YA.H; AJtR.A NA MAsr..Aitr YA NYUt::f~__ j{WA WATUMUml ... WAttbRrniA aottARt YA MAD~!!_~ Ttinapeflda ku.\o/af.aham:i.sha kuwa Wj7,ar;:i ya Afya mnAmo tarehe 23 August. 1.995 imet.oa t.amko lake raRmi j1111 ya ajira nA 7 maslahi ya nyuma kwa watumi sh i. wr1 l _; okuwr1 lrnt .i ka ut.um:i sh i wa Wizara ya Afya na kuhaki.a Medical Stores Department kama ifuatavyo: l. Utumishi wao Serikalini unr1m;:tlj:dka mm1mo tt'lrehe :l0\06\94, na hivyo wanapr1,swa kuajiriwa na Medir'.nl St.rnf~s Department kuanzia tarehe 01\07\1qq4_ 2. Maslahi ya nyuma kwr.1 wr.1tumishi waliokuwa kat.ikr1 m,rnhr1rti y;:i kudumu na Pension y/3 uzeeni yat.ahifanhiwr1 n;:i k11lipwr1 na Serikali pr1le mt.umishi ;it.akapost.;:iafu. :L Wat.um.ish.i waliokuw;i k;iti.Jrn mri!'.har·t.i ya OpArnl.ionnl Service wataenciel eri kuchnngi r1 kat. i kr3 mi f11kn yan y;:i awali ya NPF, nr1 Wizara itahnmisha Nyr1r;:ika zote 7. i.nr1,:ohus:i.ka kuwr1we:,:e:=;hr1 Merli ca 1 Stores nepart'.ment kuch;rngia Mfuko wr1 NPF Mr1kr10 Mak1111. Kut.okan/3 na ttf af anuz·i huu, 11ongo;;: i wa MSD unapenila kuwafahamisha kuwa unashugh11l i.kia mr1,rn<lali ;;:i yi:I h,n11r1 za ajira kwa Watumishi wote, nn ;;:itr1t.nlewa pincii zitakapokamilika. SGD: D. 8. Wan7.agi M_F.NF.,TA _UTUM_T SH_T_ Nakala: Mwamrn 7.MS tr .i nga 7.MS Taborn ZMS Tanga ZMS Mt.war.a 7.MS Tawi la OTTU Bohar.i y;:t Madawa M;ikao Mak11t1 Dar es Sal.a;:im". Having cr.tref ul ly cons inered and ana 1 yseiJ t. hA ;:irgumAnts f rnnt.P.<1 hy the parties; the var :i.ous communicat. i om:; ai=: net.a i J eo l y quot.en above and the law, including Act 13 of 1qq3, T havA rea~hAd a conclusion that the Attorney Gf'rneral 's ;:ipper1rr1nr:e ·in this 111r1t h-,r is legally justified because MSO is ;:i government DepartmAnt. though autonomous. 8 On the face of it_. t.he pl.;:.d_nt..i ffs' argumAnt. may SAP.Ill forceful but all this emr1nr.ited fr.om t.hA f ,3 i. l 11re of th A Mj n is t.ry of Health to clarify the legal. st.and rAg~rding t.he Ax-employees oft.he eentral medical stores upon its <'Ussolution ;:ind Ast.a bl .i.shment.· of the MSD., tnst.er.10, 't.he said Mini.st. ry ann t-.he M:=m engaged in confusiou~ communications whir.h led pAop1.e (ann just..i.£iahly so) li.ke t.he present. plaint.iff t·.o bel_ieve that t·_hP.y were no longer Government employees! How AlsA r.0111<:1 any reasonable employee interprete Ann. A, Rand C to the plaint (already quoted). Exh. B actui:tlly st.at.es r.at.egorjr.ally, "They wi.ll. ceaze t.o be Govt.. F.mployees wit.h AffAr.1·. from 30\6\1.994.: .. '', Whi.le Ahn. C, notifies al.1. employees, "Ut.timishi wao Ser i.krJ l j_ n i un;:im;:i 1 i :,:i ka mnamo t-.a rehe . 30\06\1994 11 • The confusion and uncertaJ.nJy r.1 ouding bol.h !".he Mini st r-y ;:ind MRn is vividiy dispir1yed when, aftet the plaintiff h;:id ]n~gea the claims, th~ MSD is oh record (as per Ann. G to the plaint - a letter. to plaintiff) itifor.ming him (plaintiff) that. his employer has always been the Ministry of Health! Tn hi.s letter Ref. MSD\02\0012 dated May 24, 1.996, the count.er-part. Direr.tor General, MSD, informed piaintiff. "'l'he Management of Med.i.cal St.ores nepart-.mi=mt. has r.er.e i ve<l your tetter. with great surprise. 'T'hi R is heca11sP. our office ha$ neither .i sstJed nor f.Fn-mi natP.d Amp.loymP.nt nf _. not only you, ht.it also any of Uu~ M:i n i st:.ry of Heal th employee~ wbtking wtth us. Ref er.ences show. that your ser.v i r.es werP. t.P.r.mi.natec1 through retrenchment by your. i.r1wft1l employer - the Ministry of Hea 1. t.h. Your. amployer. a.1.so paid a lJ. your t.Arm.i na J bP.ne fits for services- retidAte<'f up t.o :JOt.h .T1111A 1 qq S. r 9 :-, Following that retrenchment, MRO whn remained RR R r.11stnc'fian of ex-central Medical stores emplnyReR pending the nulfication of their employment from the government, had also the obligation to pay the henefits which WRR part nf your salary. 'J'hese payments ,were mrtde ;:ig;:i"i.nst. vour.her number. 0701.9 of 6\7\95 whir.h yn11 wrongly annexec1 ;H~ Ml evidence of making Msn your employer". f!learly the above contr.acHctor.y cnmm11nicr1t.inns r1.re inc'fir.ativA nf uncertainty on the side of t.he Mini st.ry ;mc'f MRn. I However, the quest. i.on l R .- noeR this 11nr.P.rt.aint.y r.hangP. t.he truth; the legr.il sti'lt.11s of t.he AmplnyP.P.R an<] MRn ve:t"RtlR t-.hP. Mini.stry? tn my considered views i t doesn't . 'l'he 11nr.er·t.r1 int y r1nn r.onfmdons may be grounds,. r1t. most: . of r:1 a i mR for rlam;:iges if t.her.e i.s a cJ.;:.d.m and proof t.hr11·. U1erP. w.::tR ;rny i nj11ry al r11 ·1 flowind therefrom. Now, back to my conclus inn: why h,3ve T he J c1 that t.he Attorney General has a locus :::;brndi. F.irst: ;,s right.ly suhmitte<'I by Mr. Ngwembe, slate Attorney, the import. nf t.he whole of Act 11 of 1.993 clearly leavei=: the MSD under thP. control of the Ministry of Health - section 3(1) thereto, is very categoricRl: "There is hereby esti3blished ~i.t.hin t.he Min.ist.rv respons i.hle for health an ;,11tnnnmo11s oepa r.t.mP.n t. to he known as the Med.i cal St.ores nepart.mP.nt" ( P.mphas is mine) . Wj th t.his kind of longurige, wi t.h respP.r.t. to Mr. MagP.sa, T cannot hr.ing my mind to t\jn w:i.th hi.s submii=:sion thr1t. MST) is 011t.RinA t.hP. Mi.nj Rt r.y of Heal th and that ther.ef orP. exc 1 us i ve 1 y nnt.R ·i de thP. government circles which wou]d ,:mt.a:i l t.hP. excl11Ri.on of the Attorney General's participation in st1its facing it. 'T'hP. plRin meaning of those words (in s.~(1 )) on not neP.d any other mode of interpretation other. t.hr1n the plain meaning r11le 10 • of interpretation which ohvi ously would go r.ount.P.r t.o Mt·. Magesa's i.nt.erpret.ation. R.:-1(1) iR t.hP.n s11pplemen1-P.<l hy a wide range of controls by the AovP.rnment - operations (s.4); funding (s.1.3); rlppe]lat.e r.nnt.rol in ' case of dispute ( s .12) - .in fact. though rJllt.onomous ( AS , s always the case with such cn:rntures unrle r vr1r i ous Ar.t:=: of p;:irl.iament.) .i.t. is bearJ.y out.side t.hP. r.l;:iwi:; oft.he GovP.rnment. Secondly, as will he noted by thP. Applir.Ant.\plaintiff, Ar.t 1.3 of 1993 does not. mAkA t.hi.s crP.ature (MRn) ;:i r.orpot·ntP. hody wh:i ch can sue or he i:rned. 'T'he r111 egP.<1 i n<lP.pP.n<lP.nr.P. f·hAn, in t·Aa I terms is hArd to find. - Thirdly And lastly, aga i.n, as right. 1 y s11hmi t. t:.e<l by Mr. Ngwemhe_. 'if true that plaintiff's employment. wi.t.h MSD WAS new, di.fferent from his earli.er employment. with thP. govP.rnment, logir. would require that. there should h;:ive been new terms of employment.. However., throughout. 1".he p 1 e;in i ngs i nr.1110 i ng t.he annext.urei:. thAr.P. is no .1 et. t.er which cr1n hA t.ermed as hA i ng A 1.P.tt.er of employment with MSD. ThP. only letter Reemingly relied upon is Ann. "n", ;ilrenny quot.P.d r1bove, r1nr] whir.h only indir.At.ei:; that. he had heen appointed as rJ "warehouse At.t.enn;rnt". Rurely, this cannot. be taken to be A letter ·of employment. - it. is just. ;:i letter prescribing his new duties, for, it. l;:ir.ks all parti.r.11lars common to all. letters of employment. - i .e sAl;:iry terms, conditions of employment, whether permnnent or temporary, ter.mitir1t..i.on and rel.at.ea. Jn conclusion, I should rei tA.rat.e wh;:it_ T h;:ive rJ lrea<ly expreRsed - all t.be prohlems werP. ca11sP.d by t.he Mi n.ii=:t.ry of Jtealt.h in fail.i.ng to he cat.egorir.r1l on t.hP. i:;t.At.us of the M8n Ann i.t.s operations. This is clear from t.hA r.ont.rri<ljct.ory, unr.leAr commumi.c::nti.ons ai; pRrt.J.y revAnl.eo in the varionR let.t.ers quoted 1. 1 ~ • ~ in full above. These.contradictions hy the Ministry's offir.ials however do hot change the law: true, t.hR i r ar.t inns r.ou.l ,1 mAkR :=;ome incHvtduals suffer due t.o misrRpreRent.r1t i.nns or wrong cH.n~ct.:i.ves g.i.ven but t.he consequences of this is to cl.<iim fn1.· \ damages upon proof of such injuries and nothing mnrR. Tn the premises the preliminary objections ATP. diRmissed. The Attnrney General is legaliy entitled to defend MSn And hy this nrdRr he should be made a party. Now, turning to Mr. MgwemhR's Applir.ation to r1mend thR written statement of defetice, logjc wo11ld only have it that as there was this confusion regarding represent.At.inn, parties may have heen clouded by the same to t.hP. ext.ent. of not he i ng r.1 ear AR to what was supposed to be included in the pleadings. Mr. NgwAmhe, Rt.ate Attorney, slated that. his application is based - on t.hP. fact. that he is not the ;rnt.hor nf the writh=rn st·.at.ement of dRff:mce ··cu.r.rP.nt.] y on record_. and that. there rlrR .import.ant. \, ; communi.cat.ions r.eleva.nt tot.he just. dRt.P.r.mination of the cont.r.over.sy whi.ch WP.re not r1t.t.r1r:hed. AR thP. main purpose of plEH:icH.ngs :i.s to assist_ the coutt t.o a i sr.nver U1e rAn l i RSIIP.Ft sn ~s to reach a jt1si finding in rP.sper.t of the cont.rovArsy hP.tweP.n the parties, co1Jrts should, unless t.hP.rP. is P.XcP.pt. i onaJ l y goorl cat1se t.o dec:i.d.e otherwise, ~.ffonl chA-l.'ICP. to part.i es_. wher-P.never it is possible, to amend their p1eadi.ngs. Tt. is no wonder t.hat this wisdom is expt"essly put-. in our. lr1w_. O.VT_. RulP. 17 nf t.he Ci.vil Procedure Code, ~hich providP.s, "The Court. may r.1t any stAQP. oft.he pr.nr.P.P.dings ~llow ~it:her par.ty to al.t.er or r1mend his pleadings i.n such mariner. or. on such t.P.rms r1s may hP. just_. and r.1 ll such amendmeht.s shn 11 hP. madP. aR may he necP.ssar.t for. the purpose of det.P.rmining the rP.rt] ' quest.1.ons . 1.n ' con t·. roven:;y l1e t .WP.en th . P. pAr t· .1.P.s " . Jn thP. premises Mr. Mgwembe's applicAt.inn cr1nnot. hA fa11lted And it st.Ands Allowed. t 7. On the whole therefore, the Applicant.s\Plaint.iffs preliminary objections stand dismi.RRAd. The Attorney neneral has a locus standi in thiR matter. RR the MRn is a government Department. The Attorney General to he joined as a party. At the sameti.me Mr. Ngwembe's application to amend the written statement of defen~e is granted anrl the same tn he filerl within twenty nnR dayR fr.om the date of del:iver.y of this :ruling. 'l'hereaftf:n-, thP. plaintiff to file a reply if any, within 14 days of heing sP.rvArl with the amended Writ.ten Rtatement of defence. The nist.rict Regi.Rt.r;ir, High r:ourt of 'T'an7.ania, to supArvise t.he compl iancA wj t.h the SC!hedul.e.. after. which, t.he n:~coro is to he p 1 acec'J he fore the judge in chambers for 1st Pretrial conference for fixing a speed track ano med.i.r1t.i.on ·date, unless anot.hAr prAliminary objection is nd.i:;ed, .i.n whi.ch CASA t.hP. mnt:t·.Ar wnu l rl t.hAn r.omA 11p first for hearing of the same. The 1st Pretrial ConferenC!e_. or hearing of the preliminary objections, if ~ny, as the ~~se may, to be fixed seven days ~ft.er ~omp]et.ion of the p]e~dings. No order is made as to costs. ( T.,. R. Kn 1 AQP.Yn ) ,Hmm,: t :I .......