CORAM

---

UDOMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

IRIKEFE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

IDIGBE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

DR. AKINLADE ORE FALOMO

APPELLANTS 

---

LAGOS STATE PUBLIC SERVICE

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-AUDI ALTEREM PARTEM

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant applied for an order of certiorari in response to an order of dismissal served on him for being absent from work without leave. His contention was that he was not given fair hearing.

 

---

HELD

---

The court held that the administrative action dismissing him did not offend natural justice since there was provision for subsequent appeal if a party was offended by the action

 

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the exercise of the powers of the public service commission under regulation 52 of the public service edict is a quasi-judicial one and that the commission was not only under a duty to observe the principles of audi alterem partem under the rules of natural justice, It was also bound to observe the said principle before dismissing the appellant from the public service of Lagos; since it failed to do so , the order of certiorari must issue to quash the said order of dismissal of the appellant by the commission

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THE OFFICER WHERE THE COMMISSION ACTS UNDER THE ARM OF THE SAID REGULATION WHICH EMPOWERS IT TO DISMISS THE PUBLIC OFFICER WITHOUT GIVING HIM THE CHANCE OF A HEARING

---

“Where the Commission acts under the arm of the said Regulation which empowers it to dismiss the public officer without first giving him the chance of a hearing, it is up to the officer (1) to abide by the decision or (2) to come to court for an order of certiorari. Should he elect to come to court for the prerogative order, it seems to us that, unless and until he has exercised his right under the proviso to the Regulation aforesaid and a decision unfavourable to him has been given by the Commission pursuant to the exercise of its powers under the said proviso, his application is not likely to succeed.” Per IDIGBE, JSC.

 

---

JUDICIAL NATURE OF SOME ADMINISTRATIVE ACTS

---

“It is no longer necessary, in order to establish that a duty to act judicially applies to performance of a particular exercise by an administrative body, person or tribunal, to show that the exercise is essentially or analytically of a judicial character or that it involves the determination of a lis inter parties.” Per IDIGBE, JSC.

 

---

CASES CITED

---

1. RIDGE V. BALDWIN (1964) AC 40

2. ATHANASIUS KALADA HARD V.THE MILITARY OF RIVERS STATE (1976)11 SC 211

3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE V. TANES (1958) 98 CLR 383

4. DELTA PROPERTIES PTY LTD V. BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL (1955) 95 CLR

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Not Available

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT