ERNEST YAW AWUAH APRAKU vs. ACCRA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY [2019]DLHC10214

Date	2019-03-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO. IL/043/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC10214

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).

[2019]DLHC10214
																																						<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" >ERNEST YAW
AWUAH APRAKU<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ACCRA
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT
NO. IL/043/2019&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; DATE:
25TH MARCH, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

HER
LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY
JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>Ruling<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It
is provided by the High Court (Civil
Procedure) Rules, 2004, precisely by order
25 rule 1 (1) as follows;<o:p></o:p>“The Court may grant an
injunction by an interlocutory order in all cases in &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;which
it appears to the Court to
be just or convenient to do so, and the order may be made either
unconditionally or upon such terms and conditions as the Court considers just”.
<o:p></o:p>In
the present application for interlocutory injunction, the plaintiff/applicant
requests the Court to exercise its discretion in his favour by granting the
application for injunction to restrain the defendant/respondent from proceeding
or going on with the interview and selection process with the objective to
recruit a candidate to be employed as Director of Finance pending the
determination of the substantive case of the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>In his
Statement of Case, the plaintiff states that he is the substantive Director of
Finance of the defendant institution by virtue of S.42 (6) of Act 922 (The
Technical Universities Act, 2016) which states as follows:-<o:p></o:p>“A person in the employment
of a polytechnic in existence immediately before the coming into force of this
Act, shall be deemed to have been duly employed by the respective Technical
University established under this Act on the terms and conditions attached to
the post held by that person before coming into force of this Act”.<o:p></o:p>Applicant
also says that the respondent’s conduct of advertising his position in the
national dailies while he remains at post is not only discriminatory but also a
violation of his right to work in the Public Service as a citizen of Ghana.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The
defendant/respondent on the other hand says that the plaintiff/applicant has
never occupied the position of ‘Director of Finance’ because that position is a
novel one under Act 922 and did not exist at the time the respondent was a
polytechnic institution and thus could not have been occupied by any one
including the plaintiff/applicant. The respondent therefore requests this Court
to refuse the request of the plaintiff for an order of interim injunction.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;This
Court has considered all the depositions of both parties in their respective
affidavits and has also carefully looked at all their exhibits and annexures
and the Court is of the opinion that the request for interlocutory injunction
should not be granted because the Court is in doubt as to whether the position
of ‘Director of Finance’ in the defendant’s institution is the plaintiff’s by
an accrued right. The Accra Technical University Statutes of 2018 which both
parties annexed to their affidavits shows in Statute 19 that the appointment of
a ‘Director of Finance’ is for a fixed term of 4 years in the first instance
and which term may be renewed for a further term of up to 4 years only if that
is not beyond the statutory retiring age of 60 years. The plaintiff says he has
been the Finance Officer of the defendant since the year 2003 when he was so
appointed. If indeed the position of Director of Finance is the plaintiff’s by an
accrued right, when does his initial 4 year term begin and when does it end?<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;This
Court also thinks that the grant of the present application will work more hardship
on the defendant/respondent than the plaintiff/applicant because it would not
be just and convenient to prevent the defendant/respondent from carrying out
its statutory duties under the law ie. Act 922. However in the event that it
turns out that the plaintiff is entitled to all the reliefs he is seeking from
this Court in the substantive matter, this Court is of the opinion that the
plaintiff/applicant can be adequately compensated in monetary terms.<o:p></o:p>In
the light of the foregoing this Court refuses the application for interim injunction.
However the Court will conduct a speedy trial in this matter so as to determine
the matters in controversy as between the parties. There is no award of cost
against the plaintiff/applicant.<o:p></o:p>(SGD)<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE
ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS.)<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE
OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;