1. The Petitioner moved the Court on 29 December 2023 to challenge the appointment of the 1st Respondent as the Chief Executive Officer/Managing Director of Chemelil Sugar Co Ltd.
2. The Petition went through the legal motions and judgment was scheduled for today.
3. On 5 February 2024, the Petitioner filed a Notice to Withdraw the Petition and he cited Rule 27(1)(a) of the Mutunga Rules. The Respondents have submitted that they do not oppose the withdrawal of the Petition.
4. The Rule cited by the Petitioner contemplates the Court hearing the parties before deciding whether to grant leave before a Petition is marked as withdrawn.
5. Rule 27(3) of the aforesaid Rules gives the Court the discretion to proceed with a Petition notwithstanding the wishes of a Petitioner to withdraw or discontinue the proceedings. The factor the Court should consider is the juridical effect of the decision.
6. In the present Petition, the Petitioner raised questions implicating the Respondents adherence with the values and principles governing the public service and more so the recruitment and process leading to the appointment of the 1st Respondent.
7. The question of compliance with the values and principles of the public service and how it impacts recruitment transcends the interests of the parties herein. It is a matter of public interest since public entities have a duty to respect and uphold the constitutional values and principles at all times.
ORDERS
8. For these reasons, the Court declines to grant leave for the withdrawal of the Petition and it will proceed to deliver the judgment as earlier scheduled.
2. The Petition went through the legal motions and judgment was scheduled for today.
3. On 5 February 2024, the Petitioner filed a Notice to Withdraw the Petition and he cited Rule 27(1)(a) of the Mutunga Rules. The Respondents have submitted that they do not oppose the withdrawal of the Petition.
4. The Rule cited by the Petitioner contemplates the Court hearing the parties before deciding whether to grant leave before a Petition is marked as withdrawn.
5. Rule 27(3) of the aforesaid Rules gives the Court the discretion to proceed with a Petition notwithstanding the wishes of a Petitioner to withdraw or discontinue the proceedings. The factor the Court should consider is the juridical effect of the decision.
6. In the present Petition, the Petitioner raised questions implicating the Respondents adherence with the values and principles governing the public service and more so the recruitment and process leading to the appointment of the 1st Respondent.
7. The question of compliance with the values and principles of the public service and how it impacts recruitment transcends the interests of the parties herein. It is a matter of public interest since public entities have a duty to respect and uphold the constitutional values and principles at all times.
ORDERS
8. For these reasons, the Court declines to grant leave for the withdrawal of the Petition and it will proceed to deliver the judgment as earlier scheduled.