19900316 TZHC Dar es Salaam

IH 1.l!TITI IITG::' COURT OF TAHZi'JHil. f.T Dlw ZS ru~LAt:Jl MISCELLiJIEOUS CIVIL r~FPEiiL no. 0 O:i? 19J6 ( ◊.ric;:i.nal Ewploy;.1ent Couse No, 33 of 197:J) I::aINT P.i'JC ( T) LJliITED. , •••• o • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • ~ •• , • • • • • • l~PPELIJllJT

VERSUS })AVID lli~SSL'.JI O . - : • • • • • • • • • • • ' • • • ' • • • • • • C ••••• 6 ••••••••• ~ < • f.ESP01TDEHT

JUDGMENT ---~ W.PIGAHO J. ~lis is a.n appeal fron t!le Ru.linc; of the ll.is-'lir:i.ct court of Dc\.t' es Sa.1.aa.:i (Sar.1oja ill!) dated 5/1-../86 in ·E-aployr.10nt Cause Ho, 33 of 197G. I-'.; ~as never been in dispute tJ1at the rcs:-;ontlcr1t DaVid J. IIa.,<JsaJ.1. waa once e:-.rployed. by tho appellant M/S Printpak (T) L-'cc.1.-. ao a security Guard~ The responde1Yt ,.'..:Sti tuted oi ~l proccodinc;s in the clistric..," court nu"<linst the respondent. ~.oorcli11.g to his plaint, he·was suspcndecl 011 11/3/74 pcndi11i1 tb.e aonolusion of ,:;OGrtro.n oriiilinal invostications ~ prooccdinc;s. T'.J.c police however dropped 'fhe n~ttcr and the respondent was never n.rreic;ned, Dut tllo appellaJ.1t refused to ro~:;,1.state .hin in his cmploynent. Ile Wnl1tod t:10 court to order his ro"."',1,11statcr.1011t aJ.'lil. t:'.2e payment of s).1.s .• 13,Goo/=- by the apr,olla,nt to hin boill{J or.rears of salary+ The appellont resisted tho c1ai.-;i by denyi~\.'"; t:.1c:d; it hod susporJ.Cled hiw and clcl.,.rl.nc that he hcd tGr.:iinatcd his or:1plo;yno:r'i; on his ovm accord,. The appollti.nt preyocl for tho dis;:dssal of tho suit. Jucl:::,.:ient GX-pn.t'te was onterod by Mr11 !Cc.ssi:i ~:J{ in favour of tho respondent 011 2/5/79 "M prayed wH;:1 costs" upon the dofri.ul. t o:f t:1e appellant. A decree was drc,m ~, and siB'nod 1)y -'G.b.e senior D.1Cistr2.,tc 0:1 24/5/79 • Th~t tlecroe

rode ref cron.oo · · · to arrcn.rs of salary m1d oosts only. It clicl no:11 nOlltion ~..n,y-'i.bi11£r ro,l)out 'i.;.1stc.to:.:ient. It wr..s la.tor executed and tl10 reSi)Ondent wo.s paid a. su.:i of shs. \ ;354/=. 1/ Tb.a respondent wo.s dissatisfied ui th the o;:i.iiasion o't the relief of _ro-insta.tor.1011-'c ~1- ilho dooroo. :Jo nado an application to t:10 tlistriot court in Scptcober, 1904,. sooki.nc an order for rMnstn.tor:1011t., Tho appollc..n:t opposed the a.pplioo.tion. 'Ihis is tho oa.ttor wbioh was lloarcl and disposocl of by Hr &i.acja on 5/4/G6, In his Rulil'J.G Mr Sru-.1oja. oo.vised or directed.. t:10 respondent to r.ui.ko n.n a.pplicc.tion fOT rovicw of the dooroe in torns of Order 42 rule I n.nd section 95 of tho Civil Procedure Code, nnd ho ordered that tho apr,ollnnt should in tho noantino 11trect t2.J.e cpplicont (rospondont) ashis ewployco. 11 This appeal was filed on _16/4/D6. Next t:1e appollont nae.lo t1ll Dlt application for stey of ~ocution of the RulinG of Mr. Sr.noja dn.tcd 5/4/D61 wlrl.oh wns r'.!l'Mtod by Hr. M.cl.snnohe PRU on 10/4/06. IIowovor, nr. Sc.1aojn. no.do n.nothor order on 29/tJ~6, n. str~o and and p-erplU'tine ono, purporti1,c to n.::icnd his oarlior Rulin{J by roc..(Uirine the appolln.nt to reinstate tho rosppndent effective fl:oon 2/5/79• T'uct notwi thstandine tho reSj_)o11dont prooeoded to ncl::e z:i.11. application _for roview of

the daoroe on 2/5/D6. . - 2 .... ~o appellant filc_d a o'oW1tor-:-o,ffida:vi t on •7/5/06 o:)pos-:-d. lll! tb.3.t applicn.tion. .. In view of tho order of lir. Sru.1oja dn.ted. 2?/4/,06 one foils to undcrstanc.l why tho rosponclont should h~ve b:roll{;ht that applic~tion ~tall. 1-.s I run goi?l{; to show presently both lix. Sru-1oja a.nd .Mr, Kc-,.ssi;:1 wont W1'021(;' locnlly. Tho pro'bl0t1 which fc.0od I-Tr. Sc.,acj~ on 5/4/G6 was that tho dooroo tha.t wa::; sicnod by Mr. Kc.ssi.-:i 011 24/5/79 was not properly clrc.wn up, in -'lib.at it was at Vt'rlanoo with Mr. K..".sain is eJc--:1mrto ju.d.0,:1011·~ pcssoL1 on 2/5/79, 1.s raontioned r-,bovc, tho clccrco wa.a silcn-'i; on ro--instc.tonont whio!1 wns clearly one of tho r.oliefs the:\ 1-1ere o:1bodied in tho j~""i:lcnta It is elenentarJ t:.1c..t a doorco should oonforo to ~i.e juA,1nont to whicl: it relates. Order 20 rvJ..o 6 of the Civil Proocduro Code prov:i..deo inperdii vely tJ.1<..1.t tho docroo shnl l nc,-rco with tJ.10 jude.:iont .and specify oleu.rly tho relief BT[l.nfod or other dotor;:tlnn.-'.;ion of tho· suit. And rule 7 of t'.;.c,t 0:i.~c.1.or roqUircs ~o ju4fse or mv.G,istrc'..-bc to sien it only upon boil'lC sa.tisfiod t:mt it has been ux2::wn up i'n n.ccordc:-..nce wj:'ch tllo juc1.gcacnt., ::::::::::==.. .._ ~/ As shown.1 th-. ~1oja. a.c.lvisod or sJ.i.racto~l -t;:_i~.t an n.pplioation for review

uncler Ort1.or 42 rulo I ~'),;,l sooiion 95 be nn.dc. TJ.22.:b uc..s 1·r.ro1~. Tho loc..rncc.1 r.meistratc .!ii'.'L1. power tu1clor section 96 of tha Civ"'j Procedure Cocle -'(;o &.1011cl tho cloorao; and he · -ooulc1 c.lo so suo ootu, so n.s to . 1. .:ne it in oonf'orni ty with& juc1r_pent. That section roe.do o.s follows., nc1ortcal or ~--:ionticru. nistalcos in juc1G,:i.e11ts, ~~ o~ orders, or errors arisily,; therein fror.1 <'l\ir p.o_c~_c!_entru. slip ~ onission, ~ a~ ~, titie 1~ ob~ootaa bi ¼he ·f;&-;-~ iltiio3t ol ii.a mm. rl6tl6ti cit' on the epplioation of a¥J.Y' of the l)ari tea." It w.ey also be pointed out; for the benefit of lh-. Marando, ooU11aGl for the appellc.11t, tha.t the words 11ct ~ tii-:ie" in that section :i.t1pl.,y that the exercise of the power Give11. to the oour-t by the.t section is not subjeot to any- rule of li.oitation. Tb.ct is · il1 line with the creneral principle that rules of lli1i tation are cpplicable to ~ to be :erf'orr.1ocl b~ li ticrants ancl 11ot to oo·l;s which the court r.ley', ~1 hns to ~om of its m~ notion. Du.t the ju.c1cneirt; of Mr. Kassir:i wa.s erroneous in lro-1 to the ood;en t tha.t it purported to £:;Tant the prcyer for reinstc.te::.1Eu1-'c. It r:tlcrht well be os, ti.a Mr. lVfarD.ndo seened to suroiso, t!1n.t the loamed □c'.(,1.strate 0Ea.1e to realize thct he hrul ffOne 1rro1,e i11 ·crranting th['.,t relief• If thn.t was

t~e case, then he should hc.ve forwD.I'cled t~1e reoord to the Ili.eh Court for revision'! l1a pres~ntod in the plaint this wn.s essentially n. on.so of sUi.7.Jr.ry clis.:iissol. c:¾1.Cl I entirely agree with Nr~ Nn.rnnclo thc.t it wt.a /o~Jl~rhioh its coq11iznnoe by tho court is <tt")ressly bn.rred by sto.tuto, 11c..1nel.Y' section 2G (1) of tho Socuri ty of Ebploy-.i..1ent li.o-'li 1 1964 (Ca;p 574). Dy t.!ln.t provision no suit or ot11er civil prooeedi~, other t:.i...".1'\ proceecli.l'l[;s to enforce n. decision of tho Hinistor or the Don.rd on t'.l. referonoc wmer Pnr III of thc.t li.e-'i;, shall be e11tcrtm.11od in ~ oivil cou:i:-t With recc.:rd to the ~.1nry disnissc.J. of .OJ-iy ewployeo., ( , ',i, I '._f'I ••- .. . ---~·:,:i; ---~ -3 .... ' So by v•rtue of -'c;h,'\t provision the clistrio;.,a oourt hM no jurisdiotion to adjudioato upon tho natte:r. T1.1us, rnther tJ.i.:'1.11 dirooting o:r &1.visinc tho res:,owlont to c.pply for c. roView ·of . .,lilio· decree Mr, Scnejc. should have advisocl tho appellant to ap;ly f o:r .:'. review of tho juc\..,r::1ont4 nut -'..here is suffici011t bla.-:ic to £SO rowid. in.10 O.Vi1cllant S:1oul.d have t~;;;on n. prelioinn:ry o1)joctioi1 right ·at tho caTliest possible opportunity. !Iowovor, ,it is now cstC'..1)1ished thl'..t tho valicli-ty of' n. jud@.lc11t -oan 1)o ohalloll{;ocl a.t .tho appellate st1:1...10 on the ground of wo.nt of

inherent jurisdiction on the .... l)nrii of t..i.e triol oourt, It is also ostn.blisb.ecl t:.1at tho objections 0011tet1J?ln.ted by ·section 19 of tho Civil. Prooocluro Coda arc tho· o'ujootions bc..soc1 011. tho a.llocod in~cnent of sections 14 to 1G anc1 tha-t section , • '19 does not apply to inherent lo.ck of jurisc1icc',tion wluoh- vi ti.tea'...th.fl · .._.'.,, !'J.'OOCOdil1/l, %j s court hoo boon n.skod by tho appolla.nt,. in tho o.ltorno.tivo, to doiao its powor of revision. 1 ~ - th6t- -is tho only proper thine do in to tliis oase. Aooordinel.Y.t tho· j~"Dent az-yarto 021.,.;ored by Mr. ~siw on 2/5/79 ia sot aside to the ~tent :t,ha,t it purported to ordor tho -ro-J.nst..1.ter.1ont of the respondent a.a well ns the ordelf.h tlir,t wero_ subsequontly r.1ad.o ~ Mr. Snnojo.. Delivered Mr. Mshasb.i/I~L".1.Z'n.nclo for Appollru1t. Mr. Mshashi for Respondent. 1tu°'_;:::---- 1"--9 ~ . D. P. IiJ.'PIG!iJ:TO J1IOGE 16/3/90~