CaseLaw
Shitta-Bey V. AG Fed (1998) CLR 9(a) (SC)
Brief
Facts
Briefly stated, the facts of the case as proffered by the appellant, are that he was first appointed to the post of a Crown Counsel in 1961; that he held earned series of promotions in his civil service career as State Counsel Grade 1 in 1964; Senior State Counsel in 1966; Principal State Counsel Grade 1 in 1970, Legal Adviser in 1972 and Director on Salary Grade Level 16 by 1977. Thereafter, said he, he was promoted to the rank of Acting Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation in November, 1985 – a post he held until by Exhibit B, he was abruptly retired from service.
The appellant pleaded in his statement of claim to the effect that he wrote two letters to the 2nd respondent, both to which he received no response despite the failure in all his attempts at personal calls at its office.
He sought a declaration that his retirement was irregular, illegal, null and void.
Respondents filed a joint statement of defence to the suit wherein it was averred that the retirement was pursuant to the provisions of the Public Officers (Special Provisions) Decree No. 17 of 1984.
Subsequently, by a notice of preliminary objection, the respondents contended that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear he appellant's claim.
The trial court dismissed the objection as lacking in merit.
Respondents were dissatisfied and appealed to the Court of Appeal, which allowed the appeal and struck out the suit.
Appellant dissatisfied appealed to the Supreme Court.