The Kaduna Division of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, has dismissed the case between the Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT) and Governor Nasir El Rufai for lack of merit and substance.
A statement issued by the Commissioner of Justice and Attorney General of Kaduna state, Aisha Dikko , said that Justice S.O. Edeniyi delivered judgment on the matter on February 2.
The statement which said that NUT and Comrade Audu Titus Amba were the claimants, further said that they sought for a nullification of the termination and compulsory retirement of those who failed the competency test for all primary school teachers.
The Attorney General recalled that ‘’in the bid to restore the competency of the teaching profession and improve the standard of education in schools across the state, a competency test was conducted for public primary school teachers in the state, on 3’dJune,2017.’’
Aisha Dikko said that primary school teachers who failed the competency test either had their jobs terminated or were compulsorily retired.
‘’The claimants however challenged the powers of the defendants to terminate and or dismiss from service, any teacher in the public primary school of Kaduna state, without the support of the simple majority of the Kaduna State House of Assembly,’’ she added.
The statement listed the governor of Kaduna state, the Attorney General and Kaduna State Universal Basic Education Board as defendants in the suit.
According to the Commissioner of Justice, ‘’the claimants also stated that prior to the conduct of the competency test, the Teachers RegistrationCouncil of Nigeria,(TRCN) had written a letter to the defendants to state its exclusive role as the regulating agency of the teaching profession in Nigeria and despite the letter, the defendant still conducted the competency test and set the pass mark at 75%, contrary to the agreement that the pass mark for the competency test should be 60%.’’
The statement said that Justice Edeniyi ruled that ‘’the claimants’ claims are unsupported by evidence and as a result, lacked merit. The case was accordingly dismissed and no award as to cost was made.’
