MORNAA ANKUBO RAYMOND AND THE MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR [2010]DLCHRAJ5970

Date	2010-05-18
Suit No.	Our Ref: CHRAJ/2010/HQ/01856/395
Citation No.	[2010]DLCHRAJ5970

JOSEPH WHITTAL

[2010]DLCHRAJ5970
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B050">MORNAA ANKUBO RAYMOND<o:p></o:p>(COMPLAINANT)<o:p></o:p>AND<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B050">THE MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>(CHRAJ)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 2.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 2.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">Our Ref: CHRAJ/2010/HQ/01856/395&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 18-5-2010<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>The Complainant alleged that
he was appointed as a Senior Technical Instructor by the Respondent in August
2004. According to him, he worked for 13 months but the Respondent failed to
pay him.<o:p></o:p>The Respondent, however,
denied the allegation claiming that the Complainant did not qualify for
engagement and also failed to go by the laid down regulations of the Ghana
Education Service.<o:p></o:p>ISSUE<o:p></o:p>The issues to determine are:<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; border: none;"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;
 font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
 mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">Whether the Respondent engaged the
 Complainant; and <o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 5pt; text-align: justify; border: none;"><span style="font-size:
 12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
 &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">Whether the
 Complainant is entitled to 13 months salary.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>FACTS<o:p></o:p>The Complainant in his written complaint dated 19th January, 2006
alleged that he was appointed a Senior Technical Instructor on 15th August,
2004 by the Respondent, the Municipal Director of Ghana Education Service, Wa.
He indicated that he was duly issued with an appointment letter with an
effective date of December 1, 2003, and on a salary scale of £8,590,822.00 per
annum. He further alleged that he was directed to contact the Human Resource
Unit for further instructions which he did and was directed to write an
acceptance letter. According to him, he complied with all these directives<o:p></o:p>However, after working for 13 months the Respondent failed to pay
him. When he made a follow-up to the Respondent's office to check on the
matter, he was informed that his appointment was not approved. He also stated
that the Headmaster of the school (Wechiau JSS) notified the Respondent on his
assumption of duty in the school and therefore expressed surprise that the
Respondent was not aware he was at post.<o:p></o:p>The Respondent, however, indicated that by GES regulations, all
District Directors of GES have been mandated to ensure that the recruitment of
new hands goes through before they start work. According to the Municipal
Director, it was the normal practice for District Directors to issue
appointment letters to prospective employees to facilitate the process of
recruitment while awaiting confirmation from Headquarters. She further
indicated that it was in the light of this that the Complainant was issued with
an appointment letter. He needed to wait for further directives from the
Municipal Education Office before starting actual work.<o:p></o:p>According to the Respondent,
what disqualified the Complainant for the appointment was the change in the
qualifications for the position. She indicated that Construction Technician
Part 1 Certificate holders were eligible for the position, hence the inclusion
of the Complainant in the list to be considered as an instructor. However, in
2004, qualifications for the recruitment of Technical Instructor were raised to
Construction Technician Part II and III Certificate Holders. This development
therefore, disqualified the Complainant and others. She further stated that if
the Complainant had contacted her before allegedly reporting at his station as
others did, this situation would not have arisen.<o:p></o:p>She further contended that the Complainant deliberately
over-looked the directives and laid down procedures of the GES. Adding that,
her office was</main>