Case ID:185982

Shadrack Kirimi John v Land Adjudication Officer Tigania District & another; Julius Kaugiria Mutira (Interested Party) [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Judicial Review Appplication Case 14 of 2021

Parties:

Shadrack Kirimi John v Land Adjudication Officer Tigania District & Attorney General ; Julius Kaugiria Mutira (Interested Party)

Date Delivered:

17 Nov 2021

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

Environment and Land Court at Meru

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Christopher Kyania Nzili

Citation:

Shadrack Kirimi John v Land Adjudication Officer Tigania District & another; Julius Kaugiria Mutira (Interested Party) [2021] eKLR

Advocates:

Kimathi for the respondents

Orimbo for applicant

Court Division:

Environment and Land

County:

Meru

Advocates:

Kimathi for the respondents

Orimbo for applicant

History Advocates:

Both Parties Represented

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT

AT MERU

JUDICIAL REVIEW APPPLICATION CASE NO. 14 OF 2021

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY SHADRACK KIRIMI JOHN FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR THE ORDER OF CERTIORARI

AND

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 8 AND 9 OF THE LAW REFORM ACT CAP 26 LAWS OF KENYA

AND

IN THE MATTER OF LAND PARCELS NO’S 4181 AND NO. 2413 KARAMA ADJUDICATION SECTION AND IN THE MATTER OF OBJECTION NO. 2698 AND 2699

AND

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 26 OF LAND CONSOLIDATION ACT CAP 283 LAWS OF KENYA

SHADRACK KIRIMI JOHN..…………………………………. APPLICANT

VERSUS

LAND ADJUDICATION OFFICER

TIGANIA DISTRICT…………………………..………. 1

ST

RESPONDENT

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ………….……………. 2

ND

RESPONDENT

JULIUS KAUGIRIA MUTIRA ………...…………. INTERESTED PARTY

RULING

1. By a chamber summons brought under

Order 53 Rule 1

of the

Civil Procedure Rules,

the exparte applicant seeks leave to commence judicial review proceedings for orders of certiorari to remove to this court and quash the 1

st

respondent’s decision made on

22.11.2016

in objection

No’s 2698 and 2699

for

Parcel No. 481 and 2413 Karama Adjudication Section.

2. It is also prayed, the leave once granted to act as a stay any of further proceedings or and implementation of the aforesaid decision.

3. The application is supported by a statement of facts dated

27.8.2021

and an affidavit by

Shadrack Kirimi John

sworn on

27.8.2021

. Attached to the verifying affidavit is a consent to sue dated

4.8.2021

by the

Land Adjudication and Settlement Officer Tigania East

.

4.

Section 9 of the Law Reform Act

requires an application seeking for certiorari be made within 6 months after the decision was made.

Order 53 Rule 2

of the

Civil Procedure Rules

stipulates that an application for judicial review orders of certiorari must be brought within 6 months from the date of the decision.

5. In

Nyaga –vs- Republic (1990) eKLR 291

the court took the view a court is prohibited from granting leave after expiration of six months of the decision under

Section 9 (3)

of the

Law Reform Act

as the law gives no discretion to enlarge that time.

6. In

Wilson Oslo –vs- John Ojiambo Ochola & Another (1996) eKLR

the Court of Appeal held that

Order 53 Rule 2

is derived verbation from

Section9 (3)

of the

Law Reform Act

hence it is mandatory terms.

7. In the premises I find this court lacks jurisdiction to grant leave as the action is statute barred. The chamber summons herein is dismissed with costs.

8. File closed.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS AT MERU THIS 17

TH

DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

In presence of:

Kimathi for the respondents

Orimbo for applicant

Court Assistant - Kananu

HON. C.K. NZILI

ELC JUDGE