By Stephen Simon
The National Industrial Court sitting in Jos has declared that the refusal of the Plateau State Government, the Plateau State Civil Service Commission, and the Attorney General of the state to allow Mr. Henry and 30 other workers to resume duty was wrongful, unlawful, and illegal.
Delivering judgment, Presiding Judge, Justice Ibrahim Galadima, ordered the immediate reinstatement of the affected workers in line with the directive of the Plateau State Governor and the terms of their employment letters.
The court further restrained the state government and its agencies from taking any further steps to prevent the workers from returning to their respective duty posts.
Justice Galadima also awarded ₦5 million in general damages in favour of the claimants for the unlawful denial of their right to resume duty, alongside ₦1 million as cost of action against the defendants.
The court held that the Plateau State Government and the named agencies failed to provide evidence that the claimants’ appointments had been lawfully terminated.
The claimants told the court that they were duly employed in 2022 through the State Civil Service Commission but had their appointments suspended following a change of administration in 2023.
They further explained that although a review committee set up by the new administration completed its work and the governor approved their recall, they were still denied access to their offices despite reporting for duty.
The defendants, however, argued that the appointments were temporary and subject to probation, and that the recruitment process was defective for not following due process, including proper advertisement and interviews.
They also maintained that the appointments had been effectively terminated through a government White Paper on employment review, insisting the claimants were no longer state employees at the time the suit was filed.
But counsel to the claimants countered that the governor’s directive approving their recall was binding and had not been lawfully overturned, arguing that the defendants had no legal basis to exclude them from resumption.
In its ruling, the court held that there was no valid evidence of termination of employment and that the workers were still legally entitled to resume duty.
Justice Galadima further held that the governor’s recall directive remained valid and enforceable, while the White Paper relied upon by the defendants was advisory and could not override employment rights.
The court concluded that the Civil Service Commission acted unlawfully by preventing the workers from resuming duty after the official recall order had been issued.
