DODOMA: THREE former Investigator Officers with the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) have failed in their bid to challenge their dismissal for allegedly misusing funds at PCCB SACCOS Limited.
This follows a decision given by the High Court in Dodoma, dismissing the application for judicial review in which the trio had sought for orders of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition against the PCCB, Chairman of Oversite Committee and the Attorney General, the respondents.
Judge Evaristo Longopa ruled against Hassan Chamshama, Hamisi Mkao and Ibrahim Liban, the applicants, after holding that the application in question was devoid of merits.
“Nothing on record has been demonstrated on the required standard of proof of civil cases on balance of probability that applicants are entitled to the decision of this court,” he declared in ruling delivered recently.
The Judge added: “In totality of the events, the application for orders of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition against the decisions of the respondents is delinquent of merits, thus this application deserves dismissal in its entirety. I hereby proceed to dismiss the application for lack of merits.”
During the application, the applicants requested for an order of certiorari for quashing and removing from the record the decisions of the Chairperson of the Oversight Committee dated March 27, 2024, and February 20, 2024, denying their appeals after being terminated from employment.
ALSO READ: Court quashes Dr Slaa’s false information case
They also sought for an order of certiorari for quashing and removing from the record the decisions of the PCCB made through its Director General, which was for terminating their employment.
The applicants also applied also for order of mandamus to compel the respondents act according to the requirements of the laws, the outstanding principles of natural justice and their constitutional rights and another order of prohibition against the respondents for not interfering with their employments.
Deliberating the matter, the judge said that, according to the PCCB regulations, all the allegations against the Bureau Director’s decision before the court were not proper as the same ought to have been challenged to the Chairperson of the Oversight Committee.
“This court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the application challenging the decision of the (PCCB Director) by way of judicial review. As for relief relating to mandamus which falls within the same ambit where the court lacks jurisdiction as the decision is not amenable to judicial review,” he said.
With regard to prayer of mandamus to compel the respondents to act in accordance with the requirements of law, and constitutional rights, the judge noted that there was nothing demanded by applicants to be performed and refused by the Chairman of oversite Committee.
In respect of prohibition order, he noted that the applicants stated categorically that their employments were terminated prior to institution of the application for judicial review.
Therefore, the judge said, there is nothing to prohibit as there is no existing employment relationship between the two parties.
He observed further that the court was not exercising the powers of either appellate court in civil suits or specifically revision in labour matters where it would have powers to order reinstatement of the applicants.
Such decision, the judge said, would be beyond the powers of the court in judicial review even if a prayer of certiorari is issued in the circumstances.
As regard to orders of certiorari, he pointed out that it is settled view of the court that it is untenable in law for the reasons that the decision of the PCCB Director was not a final that could be challenged by judicial review and that the applicants had alternative remedies to challenge such decision.
