Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)

Republic v Taita Taveta County Assembly Sectoral Committee on Administration, Security, Devolution, Public Participation, Community Services & Drug Control & 3 others; Governor, County Government of Taita Taveta (Interested Party); Lukindo (Ex parte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E004 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)

Not expressly stated in the judgment (judicial review proceedings delivered at Mombasa before a Judge)
8 August 2025
1,248 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Mombasa court struck out a county employee's judicial review case because he skipped the mandatory appeal to the Public Service Commission first.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The ex parte applicant was appointed political advisor to the interested party by letter dated 1 September 2022. Following a report by the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent alleging that he lacked minimum academic qualifications and held a forged degree certificate from the University of Nairobi, a recommendation dated 1 April 2025 was tabled inviting the interested party to revoke his appointment and submit a formal termination letter. The applicant, having obtained leave on 3 April 2025, filed an application dated 4 April 2025 seeking certiorari to quash the recommendation and prohibition to stop its implementation, claiming breach of natural justice. The respondents filed preliminary objections dated 9 April 2025 arguing want of jurisdiction, violation of Article 234(2)(i) of the Constitution, section 77 of the County Government Act and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act, and failure to exhaust alternative remedies. At the hearing on 7 May 2025 the respondents filed submissions but the ex parte applicant did not attend or file any. The court held that the position of political advisor falls within the governance structure of the County Government of Taita Taveta regulated by the County Government Act, so any grievance must proceed through the statutory appeal mechanism to the Public Service Commission. Relying on Speaker of the National Assembly v Karume, Hulbhai Gedi Abdille and Elizabeth Ominde, the court found section 77 mandatory and no exceptional circumstances shown. The application was struck out with costs to the respondents.

Key legal issues

#
01

Exhaustion of alternative remedies / jurisdiction

Holding

The court lacked jurisdiction as a first instance court because the ex parte applicant failed to exhaust the appeal procedure under section 77 of the County Government Act; the proceedings were premature

Reasoning

The appointment as political advisor is a position within the governance structure of the County Government regulated under the County Government Act. Grievances arising from that employment must be addressed through the mechanisms under the County Government Act and/or the Public Service Commission Act. Section 77 is mandatory, requiring appeal to the Public Service Commission before court. No exceptional circumstances justified bypassing that route, and the applicant filed no submissions to counter the objections.

p. 4
02

Failure to file submissions in response to preliminary objections

Holding

The ex parte applicant's failure to attend or file written submissions weighed against him and did not place him in good standing

Reasoning

The applicant moved the court by the application dated 4 April 2025 but did not attend court or file any written submissions when the respondents' preliminary objections came up for submissions. The court noted this omission as detracting from the applicant's standing before the court, though the disposition rested principally on want of jurisdiction and non-exhaustion.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where there is a clear procedure for the redress of a grievance prescribed by the Constitution or an Act of Parliament, that procedure should be strictly followed
  • Section 77 of the County Government Act provides a mandatory appeal mechanism to the Public Service Commission which must be exhausted before approaching the court

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The judicial review application dated 4 April 2025 is struck out
  2. 2.Costs to the respondents

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 234(2)(i)
  • County Government ActSection 77
  • Public Service Commission ActSection 87(2)

Cases cited (6)

  • Speaker of the National Assembly v Karume
    [2008] eKLR
  • Geoffrey Muthinji & Another v Samuel Muguna Henry & 1756 others
    [2015] eKLR
  • Secretary, County Public Service Board & another v Hulbhai Gedi Abdille
    [2017] eKLR
  • Republic v Migori County Secretary & Another; Migori County Public Service Board (Interested party); Ngwala & 8 others (exparte applicants)
    [2022] eKLR
  • Elizabeth Ominde & 5 others v Kakamega County Government & another
    [2020] KEELRC 1487 (KLR)
  • Orwa v County Government of Kakamega & another
    [2022] KEELRC 13056 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Judicial review jurisdiction under Order 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules (leave granted on 3 April 2025); challenged for want of jurisdiction under Article 234(2)(i) of the Constitution, section 77 of the County Government Act and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Taita Taveta County Assembly Sectoral Committee on Administration, Security, Devolution, Public Participation, Community Services & Drug Control & 3 others; Governor, County Government of Taita Taveta (Interested Party); Lukindo (Ex parte Applicant) (Judicial Review Application E004 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2379/eng@2025-08-08

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.