The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court has fixed February 26 to hear the preliminary objection filed by the University of Nigeria, Nsuka (UNN) against a suit instituted by the former Minister of Innovation, Science, and Technology, Uche Nnaji.
Justice Hauwa Yilwa fixed the date to allow the third to seventh defendants, through their counsel, Chris Uche (SAN), to serve the preliminary objection on the first and second defendants, who were not represented in court.
The first and second defendants in the suit are the Minister of Education and the National Universities Commission (NUC).
The UNN had jointly filed the preliminary objection alongside its vice-chancellor, Simon Ortuanya; the registrar of UNN, a former acting vice-chancellor, Oguenjiofor Ujam; and the university Senate, the third to seventh respondents, respectively.
They had prayed the court to strike out the ex-minister’s suit for being statute-barred.
They also urged Justice Yilwa to strike out the motion on notice for prerogative writs for being incompetent and wrongly commenced.
Mr Nnaji had filed the suit following allegations of certificate forgery levelled against him.
The former minister, in an ex parte motion, had sought an order granting him leave to issue prerogative writs prohibiting the university and its officials from “tampering with” or continuing to “tamper with” his academic records, among others.
Mr Nnaji instituted the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1909/2025 against the Minister of Education, the NUC, UNN, and Mr Ortuanya as the first to fourth respondents, respectively.
He also joined the registrar of UNN, Mr Ujam, and the university Senate as the fifth and seventh respondents, respectively.
The former minister sought leave to issue a prerogative writ of mandamus compelling the university and its officials to release his academic transcript to him and asked the Minister of Education and the NUC to exercise their supervisory powers to compel UNN to do so.
He equally sought an interim injunction restraining UNN and its officials from “tampering” with his academic records pending the determination of the substantive suit, among others.
But in their preliminary objection, they prayed the court to strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction.
They also sought an order awarding substantial costs in favour of the third, fourth, and sixth defendants.
In a nine-ground argument, they said the motion ex parte for leave was not filed within three months of the occurrence of the subject matter.
They argued that this was contrary to Order 34 Rule 4(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act 2004, which rendered the entire proceedings incompetent and robbed this court of jurisdiction.
“The substantive motion for prerogative orders was wrongly brought by motion on notice instead of an originating motion as required under Order 34 Rule 5 (1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.
“The application is incompetent, premature, and speculative, there being no prior request or denial of release of academic records or any evidence of interference with the applicant’s academic records prior to the commencement of this action,” they said.
They equally argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain “matters concerning student academic records, examinations, results, and transcripts.”
They argue that the matter is not a proceeding arising from the administration or management of any agency within the exclusive jurisdiction in Section 251(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).
They also argued that the internal remedy has not been exhausted and the applicants’ fundamental rights have not been breached.
Besides, they said no reasonable cause of action was disclosed against the third to seventh respondents, particularly the fourth respondent, Mr Ortuanya, who acted solely in his official capacity as VC of UNN, among others.
When the case was called on Tuesday, Mr Uche, who appeared for the third to seventh defendants, said the matter was to hear their objections.
Although Mr Nnaji’s counsel, Wole Olanipekun (SAN), acknowledged the receipt of the preliminary objection, there was no proof of service of such in the court record to show that the first and second defendants had been served.
Justice Yilwa then adjourned the matter until February 26 and ordered that the Minister of Education and NUC, who are the first and second defendants, be served with the process.
(NAN)
Discussion about this post