JOSEPH PWOAWUVI WEGURI VRS C. K. TEDAM UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY AND APPLIED SCIENCES (CKT-UTAS) & 3 ORS

In this appeal, the parties will retain their designation in the Court below. The Plaintiff in this appeal instituted this action for the following reliefs against the Defendants:

(a) Declaration that the purported appointment of 3rd and 4th defendants as Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar of 1st Defendants is null and void.

(b) An order compelling 3rd and 4th defendants (sic) refund all sums of money, including salaries and allowances, 3rd and 4th defendants received from the Consolidated Fund and/or from 1st defendant; and (c) Costs including legal fees of plaintiff.

The Plaintiff contended that the 1st Defendant was established by the C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences Act, 2019 (Act 1000) with the aim of providing quality tertiary education and promoting academic research. Act 1000 mandated 1st Defendant to appoint its officers, including a Vice-Chancellor and Registrars, in accordance with the statutes of the University.

Plaintiff’s position was that the public service laws of Ghana, especially Article 199 of the Constitution, 1992 as amended by Act 527, require public officers to retire from full-term service at the age of sixty (60).

On 1st December 2020, 1st Defendant, by letters, appointed 3rd Defendant as Vice-Chancellor and 4th Defendant as Registrar of 1st Defendant for a fullterm of four (4) years.

The 3rd Defendant, who had retired as a public officer of the University of Cape Coast in the year 2019, was first appointed as an interim vicechancellor of 1st Defendant.

Plaintiff’s contention was that though 3rd Defendant attained sixty (60) years in April 2022 and 4th Defendant attained sixty (60) years in August 2021, they have remained in full-term employment of 1st Defendant, and they have been receiving salaries and allowances, from the Consolidated Fund.

It is the case of Plaintiff that the continuous occupation of office, and withdrawal of salaries and allowances from the Consolidated Fund by 3rd and 4th defendants as public officers in full-time employment of the University after they have attained the age of compulsory retirement and after 3rd Defendant had retired from the public service is not only unlawful but also illegal.

Plaintiff contends that 1st and 2nd Defendants have acted in an unlawful, arbitrary and capricious employment of the University to 3rd and 4th Defendants and by allowing 3rd and 4th Defendants to remain in full-term employment after 3rd and 4th Defendants have attained