The Presiding Judge, Kano Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court, Hon. Justice E. D. Isele has dismissed the preliminary objection filed by the National Youth Service Corps questioning the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case brought by one Aminu Rufa’i for lacking merit and adjourned the matter to the 3rd of November 2022 for hearing.
Justice Isele held that the provision of the NYSC Act merely gave Aminu Rufa’i a right of Appeal to the Presidency over a decision of the Directorate and did not impose a duty on him to do so, and the Court’s Jurisdiction is in no way ousted.
From facts, the claimant- Aminu Rufa’i is seeking among others a declaration that the act of the NYSC in reaching a conclusion, in its letter dated 16th July 2015, without affording him a fair hearing, that a three (3) man committee has indicted him for serious misconduct, is unlawful and unconstitutional; and urged the court to set aside his suspension and dismissal from service.
In defense, the defendant- National Youth Service Corps urged the court to dismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction and competence on the grounds that the suit is statute-barred and premature.
The NYSC stated that the suit was filed four (4) years and ten (10) months of the accurred cause of action against the three months prescribed by Law within which the respondent is to seek redress and further that Aminu did not appeal to the presidency in respect of his grievance before he instituted the suit against the agency in line with the provision of the National Youth Service Corps, Act.
In opposition, the learned claimant counsel, S. D. Othman, Esq. submitted that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter and urged to dismiss the objection for lacking merit.
In a well-considered ruling, the presiding Judge, Justice E.D. Isele held that the action as filed by Aminu Rufa’i is not Premature and the Court’s Jurisdiction is in no way ousted, that the court has to be satisfied that the actions executed by the public officer was done in bad faith or did not amount to an abuse of office or was not exercised in breach of his statutory or constitutional duty.
The Court further ruled that the provision of the NYSC Act does not provide for a situation of possible non-compliance of the Claimant as no duty was imposed on Aminu Rufa’i by the law and further that the NYSC Act did not oust the Judicial powers of the Federation or state as contained in section 6(1), (2) of the 1999 Constitution as amended as well as S. 36(1) of the same constitution.
visit the judgment portal for full ruling
