Abdi v National Police Service & 6 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2527 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan police officer denied pay for seven years while mentally ill won Kshs 3.9 million because his employer never followed due process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the impugned Signal No. C/ORG/5/44/VOL.II/29 dated 22nd May 2015 stopping the Petitioner's pay and the letter dated 4th August 2022 citing him for desertion were unlawfully issued in violation of his constitutional rights
- 2.Whether the Respondents violated the Petitioner's right to sick leave with full pay and fair labour practices under Article 41
- 3.Whether the Petitioner's right to fair administrative action under Article 47 was violated by failure to subject him to a disciplinary process
- 4.What remedies flow from the violations
Key legal issues
#Unlawful stoppage of salary during sickness
The stoppage of the Petitioner's salary in 2015 was unlawful because the Respondents had prior knowledge of his mental illness and failed to verify his capacity to work before stopping pay.
The court found the Petitioner had suffered ongoing mental incapacity from 2015 and was under treatment at KNH from 2013 to 2024. The Respondents had signals informing them of his condition, so they could not treat him as a mere absentee. They were obliged to demonstrate efforts to trace him and establish he was fit before stopping his salary; they did not.
Failure to accord fair administrative action / disciplinary process
The Respondents violated the Petitioner's rights by keeping him suspended without pay since 2015 without subjecting him to any disciplinary process, even after adverse recommendations in the letter of 4th August 2022.
Although the letter of 4th August 2022 recommended a signal of long absence, striking him off strength, withdrawal of kit, and possible trial in absentia leading to dismissal, no committee was ever appointed to hear him. The court held this was a grievous omission and found for the Petitioner on this basis.
Reinstatement as a remedy
Reinstatement was refused because of the length of the period the Petitioner had been off duty.
The Petitioner had not been on duty from 2015 to 2022. The court found the long absence rendered reinstatement untenable, and instead awarded monetary reliefs: unpaid salary to the date he was cited for desertion, notice pay, and constitutional damages.
Legal principles established
#- An employer who knows an employee is unwell cannot keep the employee in limbo without pay and without a disciplinary process; it must first demonstrate efforts to trace and verify the employee's condition before stopping pay.
- Stopping an employee's salary without following up with a disciplinary process and keeping the employee suspended indefinitely without pay is a grievous breach.
Court orders
#- 1.Petitioner be paid all unpaid salary from 2015 to 4th August 2022, Ksh 3,389,760/-
- 2.Petitioner be paid one month's salary in lieu of notice, Kshs 35,310/-
- 3.Damages for breach of constitutional rights of Kshs 500,000/-
- 4.Total award of Kshs 3,925,070/- less statutory deductions
- 5.Prayer for reinstatement denied
- 6.Respondents to pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 25, 41, 47 and 50 of the Constitution - constitutional petition for violation of labour rights and fair administrative action
Relief refused
#Reinstatement to the National Police Service without loss of benefits, rank or position
Length of absence from duty made reinstatement impracticable
Orders of certiorari to quash the letter of 4th August 2022 and the signal of 22nd May 2015; terminal dues claims for unpaid leave and service pay; general damages
Not expressly granted in the final orders; the court instead awarded unpaid salaries, notice pay and constitutional damages
Costs
The respondents will pay costs of the suit plus interest at court rates with effect from the date of judgment.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the circumstances of this case, I find for the petitioner and direct that: 1. He be paid all his salary not paid, from 2015 to 4th August 2022 when he was finally cited for desertion Ksh 3,389,760/-.
I also award him damages for breach of his constitutional rights being kshs 500,000/-
In view of the length of period that the petitioner has not been on duty, prayer for reinstatement is not tenable.
It was indeed a grievous omission from the respondents to keep the petitioner at limbo all this while whilst knowing of his medical condition.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Abdi v National Police Service & 6 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E006 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2527 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 26th June 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2527/eng@2025-09-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.