The Presiding Judge Kaduna Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court, His Lordship, Hon. Justice Sinmisola Adeniyi has dismissed the case filed by One Abdulhamid Mohammed against the Director of State Security Services over alleged unlawful employment dismissal for lacking merit.
Justice Adeniyi held that Mohammed has not established how he was unlawfully dismissed that the evidence tendered is speculative and a court is precluded and should not decide a case on a mere assumption, conjecture, or speculation.
From facts, the claimant – Abdulhamid Mohammed had submitted that an allegation of misconduct was leveled against him by his employer, the State Security Service that the act of not setting up a disciplinary committee to investigate the pending allegations is punishment for him and the decision to take disciplinary action against him without following the due process of the law is unlawful.
In defense, learned counsel submitted that the State Security Service complied with the laid down procedure in dismissing Mohammed from service that he (Mohammed) was afforded the fair hearing and has been declared a deserter for been away from his duty for over 7 days; that as a deserter he had effectually dismissed himself from service by his refusal to report for duty urged the court to dismiss the case in its entirety.
Learned counsel argued that the state security services afforded the Claimant fair hearing by issuing him a query, caused an investigation into the allegations and the case of misconduct was established; asked for a determination whether from the facts and evidence led in the trial if Mohammed has proved his case to enable the grant of the reliefs sought?
In opposition, Mohammed’s counsel, G. O. Ochai Esq submitted that the purported investigation of the alleged misconduct for corrupt practices was conducted without affording his client fair hearing and opportunity to defend the allegation, urged the court to grant the reliefs sought.
Delivering the judgment after careful evaluation of the submission of both parties, the Presiding Judge, Justice Sinmisola Adeniyi held that Mohammed is required to adduce credible evidence to establish his entitlement to the declarations sought and should not rely on the admissions in the pleadings of the Defendants.
The court held that there is no evidence that the query issued by the Defendants was to victimize the Claimant, neither is there any evidence of a threat to his life.
“The Claimant’s evidence as pleaded and elicited during cross-examination leaves no doubt that he has not established his claim that he was unlawfully dismissed. The evidence of the Claimant is speculative and impacts the veracity of his claim. The reliefs sought are also based on a decision of the Defendants which is also no evidence before the Court.
“The general principles guiding the proof of a claim for termination or dismissal of employment have remained sacrosanct. For the Claimant to succeed in his claim, he must prove that the Defendants did not comply with the procedure stipulated by law for his removal.” Justice Adeniyi ruled.
