BY SAM ALFAN.
Labour court will next month rule on whether to reinstate three sacked Mandera County executive committee members and a chief officer or not.
This is after Justice Onsmus Makau heard the submissions by the four and Mandera Governor Ali Roba.
They four are Mandera County Executive Committee Member in charge of Trade , Investment, Industrialization and Cooperative development Abdlaziz Sheikh Maad, Executive member in charge if of Gender and Social Services Shamsha Mohammed Haji, Jahora Mohammed Abdi for Agriculture, Livestock and and fisheries and Chief officer in charge of Medical services Hassan Mohammed Ahmed sued the Mandera Governor for relieving them their duties in his administration.
In their petition, the four Mandera County government officials wants court to make a declaration that the decision by Governor Ali Roba to relieve their duties is null and void.
They wants the labour court to quash the Governor decision to sack the three county executive committee members and the chief officer.
The also wants the Governor prohibited from appointing any fresh nominee for approval by the Mandera county Assembly as members of Mandera County Executive or chief officer.
Further, the four wants Governor Roba to be ordered to pay them all dues in the period that they would have served as executive members of his administration.
The petitionera through lawyer Peter Wanyama told justice Makau the decision by the Governor to dismiss his clients, violated their rights to a fair hearing and fair labour practices contrary to the constitution.
“The purported dismissal of the petitioners was in out rightly breach of sections 4 of the fair administrative action Act and sections 41 and 45 of Employment Act”, submitted Wanyama.
He added that the Governor and Mandera County Public Service board purported to dismiss the petitioners from their duties as county executive committee members in circumstances that are illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional without any sufficient reasons for such and without being given fair hearing or without being afforded any opportunity for a fear hearing.
They further argued they were discharged their responsibilities religiously without any complaint ever having been raised against them or without any justification in law on February 13, this year.
They told the court they were not given a warning , they were never issued with a notice to show cause , neither were they afforded a hearing to respond to the allegations against them.
