The Bolgatanga High Court has issued a perpetual injunction against Professor Eric Magnus Wilmot and Dr. Vincent Ankamah-Lomotey, who serve as the Vice Chancellor and Registrar, respectively, at the C. K Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences. The order prohibits them from holding the aforementioned positions. This information was contained in a judgment obtained by A1 Radio. The ruling was delivered by Bolgatanga High Court Judge, Justice Charles Agyei Wilson.
Additionally, the duo is not to undertake any activities pertaining to the aforementioned roles.
It would be recalled that Joseph Pwoawuvi Weguri, the plaintiff, sued the four defendants, C.K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences (CKT-UTAS), the Attorney General, Eric Magnus Wilmot and Vincent Ankamah Lomotey, on March 20, 2023. The defendants claimed, “Declaration that the purported appointment of the 3rd and 4th defendants as vice-chancellor and the registrar of the 1st defendant is null and void, an order compelling the 3rd and 4th defendants to refund all sums of money, including salaries and allowances, they received from the consolidated fund and from the 1st defendant, and costs, including legal fees of the plaintiff.” Weguri maintained that the duo was in flagrant violation of the law, including a breach of public service laws in Ghana, particularly Article 199 of the Constitution, 1992.
Mr. Weguri, a resident of Navrongo, in his arguments in court, contended that the public officers continued their full-term employment beyond the mandatory retirement age. Additionally, the court maintained that Mr. Weguri was an upstanding citizen of the area and, as such, had not abused the court, as had been argued by the defendants.
“The plaintiff is a well-respected, outspoken, forthright citizen who has a genuine, serious interest and demonstrable willingness to litigate the issue in the public interest and in the service of upholding the constitution and the rule of law. I am satisfied that the petition is not an abuse of the process of the court, and, as such, it is not unreasonable that it should be pursued. For this reason, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff’s relief should be upheld.”
However, the court did not agree with the plaintiff’s demand for a full refund. “Now looking at the 3rd and 4th defendants’ letters of appointments, it is unlikely that the defendants would be able to pay back all arrears of salary. For the reasons herein given, I dismiss the plaintiff’s reliefs for a refund of salary and allowances from the consolidated fund.”
Read the full judgement here: CKT-UTAS Court Case
Source: A1Radioonline.Com|101.1MHZ|Mark Kwasi Ahumah Smith|Bolgatanga
