Media
- Home
- Details
The National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Ibadan division on the 30th day of January 2018 delivered judgment in favor of a claimant, reversed his summary dismissal and directed the Defendant to pay him all his terminal entitlements in the case of Mr. Adigun Khalid Adeshina v. Central Bank of Nigeria
On October 2, 2015 the claimant through his counsel A.O. Ajayi Esq. filed complaint against the defendant sought among others: A Declaration that the dismissal of the Claimant by the Defendant is unjustifiable, unconstitutional, ultra vires and of no effect whatsoever. An Order setting aside the purported letter of dismissal dated 2nd July, 2015
In response, the defendant counsel R. O. A. Adegoke Esq. entered appearance and filed its statement of defence together with its other defence processes in compliance with the Rules of the Court.
The case of the claimant is that he was initially employed by the defendant as Senior Security Guard, a senior cadre before the position was withdrawn and substituted with a lesser position as Security Guard 2 after he had completed documentation. The substituted position was a junior staff position with two levels behind the original offer. However, following the advice given to him that he can only be promoted to the senior staff cadre if he has a degree qualification; he applied for and was granted permission to pursue a part time course at the National Open University of Nigeria. On successful completion of the course, the claimant duly notified the defendant who congratulated him for it but disappointedly, the defendant changed its policy to the effect that upgrade of its staff was no longer automatic but subject to availability of vacant position.
Consequently, the case of the defendant on the other hand is that while the Bank was notified about and approved the claimant’s pursuit of his part-time programme at the National Open University of Nigeria, the defendant was not aware of the claimant’s Masters’ degree programme. The defendant continued its averment that following an on-going investigation conducted by the Bank’s Special Investigation Panel (SIP), the claimant and some other employees who were indicted after appearing before the panel were transferred to other branches pending further enquiries and as a precaution to hindering proper investigation. To the defendant, the claimant’s resignation was calculatedly tendered to avoid appearing before the disciplinary panel and facing the consequences of his involvement in the alleged infraction that took place in the defendant’s Ibadan office.
During the hearing of this case, the claimant testified as CW1 while one Tolulope Abayomi Showole testified as DW1 on behalf of the defendant. Thereafter, the Court directed counsel to the parties to file their final written addresses in line with the Rules of the Court and counsel complied with the direction.
After reviewing the argument of both parties, the Presiding Judge, Hon. Justice F. I. Kola-Olalere had this to say;
“I find and hold and hold that because the summary dismissal of the claimant was not based on any specific behaviour as listed in Clause 6.4.4.2 B. of the defendant’s the Human Resources Policy and Procedure Manual (HRPPM), Document D.6; the summary dismissal is wrongful. What’s more; since I have held above that the resignation of the claimant’s appointment became operative in law from March 24, 2015 when the registration letter was received by the defendant, any other disciplinary action taken against the claimant by the defendant after the resignation is a nullity because there is no longer any employer employee relationship between the parties. Furthermore, since the claimant has resigned from his employment with the defendant with effect from March 2015, the defendant is hereby directed to pay the claimant his terminal benefits in accordance with the terms and conditions of his employment.”
Judgment is entered accordingly.
For full Judgment, click here
