A Sekondi High Court has ordered the management of Ghana Posts Company to immediately reinstate the Solicitor of the Company for wrongful dismissal.
The court also requested the company to pay GHC 2,000 to the plaintiff, Mr. Stephen Kwesi Kesse, as damages and pay all monies due him since the time his salary was frozen by the company.
The presiding Judge, Justice Nicolas Agbevor, said the removal of the name of the plaintiff from the company’s payroll was a breach of contract that contravenes the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) signed between the former and the latter.
Justice Agbevor said the judgment is in respect of a motion on notice brought under Article 33(1) of the 1992 Constitution and Order 67 Rules 1 and 2 of Constitutional Instrument 47 by the plaintiff.
He said the plaintiff prayed the court for reinstatement of name on his employer’s payroll after wrongful removal without notice.
Justice Agbevor avers that the court’s decision was based on the desire for justice and that each party to every agreement must be strictly adhered to.
The applicant stated that he is the legal representative of the Ghana Posts Company in charge of Western and Central regions based in Takoradi.
The plaintiff received a notice of transfer from his duty town, Takoradi to Accra with effect from August 13, 2012.
He therefore petitioned the Managing Director of the company, Mr Abdulai Rafui, to cancel the transfer on the grounds that he was a nominee of the President of Ghana to the Ahanta West District Assembly serving on a number of committees.
His petition was refused in a letter dated May 14, 2012 by the Managing Director. As a result of the refusal to reverse the transfer, the plaintiff appealed to the Board Chairman of the company.
The court said while awaiting response to his appeal to the Board Chairman and without notice to him, the solicitor’s name was removed from the respondent’s payroll.
It is the said removal that plaintiff contends it is against the constitutional provision of fair hearing and a breach of fundamental human right and being inconsistent with the CBA signed between them.
The court held that the plaintiff, having been made a government nominee of the District Assembly, he could not proceed on the transfer by his employer.
For this, the sanction imposed on the petitioner was not one that amounted to termination of his employment, hence the need for his immediate reinstatement.
