Wakilii

Nanongo Milali Milton v Permanent Secretary Education Service Commission and Others [2025] UGHC 514

High Court · 2025 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Judicial review application challenging termination from public service and procedural irregularities in disciplinary proceedings
Decision
Application partly allowed. Declaration of procedural impropriety granted. General damages of UGX 30,000,000 awarded. Writs of certiorari and mandamus refused. Reinstatement and salary arrears refused.

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The High Court held that the Education Service Commission's failure to conduct prompt disciplinary proceedings against a public servant who abandoned duty, leaving him off the payroll for ten years without a decision, constituted procedural impropriety and unfairness. While the applicant had abandoned duty and forfeited his office, the respondents' irregular conduct entitled him to general damages for breach of statutory duty and misfeasance in public office. The court declined to quash the termination or order reinstatement.

Outcome

Application partly allowed. Declaration of procedural impropriety granted. General damages of UGX 30,000,000 awarded. Writs of certiorari and mandamus refused. Reinstatement and salary arrears refused.

Facts

The applicant was a tutor at Bushenyi Core Primary Teachers College. In January 2007, he was asked to explain allegations of misconduct. He ceased attending work and requested a transfer, which was refused. He abandoned his duty station and was removed from the payroll. In May 2009, he appeared before a disciplinary committee but was never informed of the outcome. In 2016, investigations revealed he had been employed at Kampala University since 2009. In September 2017, his services were terminated for abandonment of duty and violation of Public Service Regulations. The applicant challenged the termination and the prolonged failure to conduct proper disciplinary proceedings.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is amenable for judicial review?
  2. Whether the application discloses grounds for judicial review?
  3. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • A declaration doth issue that the act of the 1st respondent in failing to conduct regular and prompt disciplinary proceedings against the applicant leaving him off the pay roll for approximately ten years constituted procedural impropriety and unfairness.
  • The applicant shall be paid a sum of UGX 30,000,000/= (Uganda Shillings Thirty Million Only) by the 1st and 3rd respondents as general damages.
  • The applicant shall be paid two-thirds of the costs of the application by the 1st and 3rd respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Amenability — Public Body — Public Law Matter
For a matter to be amenable for judicial review, it must involve a public body in a public law matter. The court must be satisfied that the body under challenge is a public body whose activities can be controlled by judicial review, and that the subject matter involves claims based on public law principles and not the enforcement of private law rights.
Judicial Review — Grounds — Procedural Impropriety — Duty to Conduct Prompt Disciplinary Proceedings
Where a public authority has the power and duty to take disciplinary action against an employee for abandonment of duty, its failure to subject the employee to clear and prompt disciplinary proceedings as provided for under the Public Service Standing Orders constitutes procedural impropriety and unfairness, even where the employee was at fault.
Public Service — Abandonment of Duty — Forfeiture of Rights
Under the Public Service Standing Orders, where an officer abandons duty, he or she is deemed to have relinquished his or her office and shall forfeit all rights and privileges attached to the office with effect from the date of abandonment. The omission to subject the officer to proper disciplinary proceedings does not entitle him or her to regain the office.
Judicial Review — Remedies — Certiorari — Discretion to Refuse
Where a court finds instances of procedural impropriety in the termination of a public servant's employment, but the employee was himself at fault for abandonment of duty and had already lost the office on account of his own conduct, the court may decline to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the termination decision. The irregular conduct may only entitle the employee to damages.
Judicial Review — Damages — Additional Cause of Action Required
In judicial review, there is no right to claim for losses caused by unlawful administrative action. Damages may only be awarded if the applicant, in addition to establishing a cause of action in judicial review, establishes a separate cause of action related to the cause of action in judicial review which would have entitled him or her to an award of damages in a separate suit, such as breach of statutory duty or misfeasance in public office.

Legislation cited (22)

Cases cited (13)

  • Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for Civil Service (1985) AC 375
  • Attorney General v Yustus Tinkasimmire & Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 208 of 2013)
  • Kuluo Joseph Andrew & Others v Attorney General & Others (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 106 of 2010)
  • ACP Bakaleke Siraji v Attorney General (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 212 of 2018)
  • Dr. Lam-Lagoro James v Muni University (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 007 of 2016)
  • Editors Guild Uganda Limited & Another v Attorney General (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 400 of 2020)
  • Kampala University v National Council for Higher Education (High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 053 of 2014)
  • Three Rivers District Council v Bank of England (3) [2003] 2 AC 1
  • X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] 2 AC 633
  • Hadley v Baxendale (1894) 9 Exch 341
  • Charles Acire v M. Engola (High Court Civil Suit No. 143 of 1993)
  • Kibimba Rice Ltd v Umar Salim (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1992)
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Nanongo Milali Milton v Permanent Secretary Education Service Commission and Others 2025 UGHC 514 (9 July 2025)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.