1. Vide a petition dated 1/4/2025 the petitioners herein seek the following orders;
a. A declaration that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents conduct and actions jointly and severally contravene the Constitution and/or are likely to contravene or infringe upon the Petitioner's fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed under article 40 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 in so far as they relate to enforcement of the decision in Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal No Case No. 35 of 2010 Joel Kithaka Maringa Vs Samwel Kivuti Ciriba as contained in the Decree issued on 04/11/2011.
b. A declaration be issued that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents’ action in demarcating alienating and or allocating and issuing titles in respect of Block No 148/Gichiche Adjudication Section in enforcement of the decision in Land Dispute Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010 Joel Kithaka Maringa vs Samwel Kivuti Ciriba as contained in the Decree issued on 04/11/2011 is null and void
c. An order of prohibition directed to all Respondents jointly and severally prohibiting any and all of them from carrying out demarcation, alienation and or allocation and issuance of titles in respect of Block No 148/Gichiche Adjudication Section until the Provisions of the Land Adjudication Act Cap 284 are adhered to.
d. Any other relief that this Honourable Court may deem fit and just to grant the interest of justice.
2. The Petitioners did not file a supporting affidavit to the Petition. According to the Petition, the Petitioners’ case is that they are members of the Mugwe Clan of Mbeere within Embu County, and that they were allocated Block No. 148 of Gichiche Adjudication Section. They aver that the Ngui Clan lodged a dispute before the defunct Gachoka Land Disputes Tribunal, which, upon hearing the dispute, delivered its decision on 18/08/2008 in favour of the Mugwe Clan and awarded them the suit land. They aver further, that instead of appealing that award, the Ngui Clan filed another dispute before the Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal which also ruled in favour of the Mugwe Clan. They aver that the actions of the Ngui Clan were unprocedural as there already existed a valid award and that this brought about confusion due to conflicting awards from two different tribunals.
3. The Petitioners’ aver that the matter later escalated to the Environment and Land Court where Mugwe Clan filed Embu ELC Case No. 219 of 2014 which gave a judgement dividing Block 148 equally between the Mugwe Clan and the Ngui Clan. The Ngui Clan aggrieved by the decision appealed to the Court of Appeal in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to determine disputes relating to land under adjudication. They contend that a consent was subsequently entered by the parties to the extent that the Environment and Land Court at Embu did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine land disputes touching on land under an adjudication section. They further contend that the 1st respondent in an advisory opinion to the Petitioners lawyers agreed that the courts do not have jurisdiction on land disputes touching on land under an adjudication section.
4. The Petition was accompanied by a bundle of documents including: the 1st respondent’s advisory letter dated 7/3/2024, a letter dated 8/4/2024, Minutes of the Gichiche Adjudication Section Tribunal sitting on 20/04/1995, Proceedings of Gachoka Land Dispute Tribunal in claim No. 330 of 2007, a decree in Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010, judgement in ELC Case No. 219 of 2014, a consent and order as well as the memorandum of appeal in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019.
5. By way of a response and opposition to this Petition, the 3rd and 4th Respondents, through the Deputy Chief Land Registrar Kiritiri one Margaret M. Mutai filed a replying affidavit dated 6/8/2025. She stated that Gichiche/Gichiche/148 is an adjudication section within Mbeere South, registered as parcel number 148 and not a block, and that it was a first registration from adjudication, forwarded to Kiritiri Land Registry through the Chief Land Registrar as required by law. The land was registered on 9/9/2024 and subdivided on 1/10/2024.
6. She averred that the adjudication record forms the first document before commencing land registration and that the adjudication register indicates that the Ngui Clan and not the Mugwe Clan was allocated the suit land. She stated that the land belongs to Ngui clan members who lawfully obtained the Land Control Board consent. She averred that the consent in nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019 was signed by advocates for both parties agreeing that the appeal be allowed. She maintained that the Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal awarded the suit land to the Ngui clan, as reflected in the records within the Land Registrar’s office. She attached a copy of a mutation form and green card for the suit land, a bundle of correspondence, copies of the adjudication record of the suit land, a copy of the consent of the Land Control Board, a copy of the consent in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019 and a copy of the proceedings in Land Disputes Tribunal Claim No. 330 of 2008.
7. By way of a response and opposition to this Petition, the 5th Respondent also filed a replying affidavit dated 04/06/2025 where he deposed that he is the current Chairman of the Ngui Clan. He stated that the dispute over Block 148 formed part of P.M.C.C. No. 3 of 2006 at Siakago, which was later transferred to the Environment and Land Court and re-registered as ELC Case No. 219 of 2014, following orders issued in H.C.C.A No. 62 of 2009 at Embu. He averred that the suit was ultimately determined by the Court of Appeal in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019. He averred that following the conclusion of the long running court dispute between 2006 and 2023, the members of the Ngui Clan subdivided the suit land and have already been issued with individual titles being Gichiche/Gichiche Nos. 5576-5776 and accordingly the said block does not exist.
8. He deposed that when the Gichiche Adjudication Section was declared pursuant to the Land Adjudication Act under Legal Notice No. 169 of 1970, the Ngui Clan successfully claimed the subject Block 148 in accordance with sections 5 and 13 of the Land Adjudication Act and they were duly recorded on 10/12/1974 as the owners of the said Block. He deposed that the Mugwe Clan neither claimed the said land nor did they challenge the recording of the said decision in the manner provided by law.He averred that the Mugwe Clan instead proceeded to lodge procedurally baseless disputes against the Ngui Clan, including Gachoka Land Dispute Tribunal Claim No. 330 of 2007 Samuel Kivuti Ciriba v Joel Kithaka Maringa and Gichiche Adjudication Section Land Dispute of 20/04/1995 Nyaga Mbawa v Maringa Mbiruri, both of which were initiated by the Mugwe Clan, contrary to the Petitioners’ pleadings.
9. He accused the Mugwe Clan of being corruptly assisted by officials of the Provincial Administration in its attempt to dispossess the Ngui Clan of the said Block 148. He averred that the 1995 adjudication dispute was heard by the District Officer, Gachoka Division, but was summarily rejected by the Director of Land Adjudication and Settlement for lack of legality under Cap 284. It was further stated that although the Gachoka Land Dispute Tribunal Claim No. 330 of 2007 was also tainted by corrupt interference, it was overturned on appeal by the Provincial Land Disputes Appeals Committee, which ordered a fresh hearing at the Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal in Claim No. 330 of 2008 and the decision arising therefrom was later enforced at Sikago as PM’s Land Disputes Tribunal No. 35 of 2010.
10. He further stated that the Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal Claim No. 33 of 2008 and the resultant decree dated 4/11/2011 issued in Siakago PM’s Land Disputes Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010 were set aside by the High Court in H.C.C.A No. 62 of 2009, and that this position was reaffirmed by the Environment and Land Court in its judgment dated 7.2.2019, which declared the tribunal proceedings and the resultant decree null and void. It was contended that upon the Court of Appeal setting aside the ELC judgment in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019, the Mugwe Clan’s claim was terminated once and for all, thereby reviving the adjudication records.
11. He denied that the issuance of titles was an enforcement of tribunal decisions and averred that the 2nd and 4th Respondents merely implemented the adjudication register in accordance with sections 24, 25 and 28 of the Land Adjudication Act. He contended that the prayers in the Petition were not grantable, the subject land having already been subdivided and titles issued, and that the Petition raised no distinct constitutional issues. He urged that the Petition be dismissed with costs.
12. He attached copies of the pleadings, orders and decrees in the respective cases and a copy of the adjudication record of the subject land.
13. When this Petition came up for directions, the parties agreed that the same be canvassed by way of written submissions.
14. The Petitioners filed their submissions dated 23/09/2025 wherein they stated that the land in dispute being Block No. 148/Gichiche Adjudication Section is land within an adjudication area, and as such, the Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284) as read together with the Constitution provide a framework for handling land matters in such areas. They relied on the cases of Julia Kaburia v Manene Kabeere & 6 others (Civil Appeal No. 340 of 2002)(2007) KECA 61 (KLR) and Joseph Kiruja Maingi v Rose Nambura & 2 others (2021) KEELC 3103(KLR) to support that position.
15. The Petitioners reiterated that they, as members of the Mugwe Clan of Mbeere within Embu County, were allocated Block 148. They averred that the Ngui Clan improperly invoked the jurisdiction of the Gachoka Land Dispute Tribunal, which on 18/08/2008 ruled in favour of the Mugwe Clan and awarded them the land. That instead of appealing that award, the Ngui Clan allegedly filed a second dispute before the Siakago Land Dispute Tribunal, resulting in two conflicting decisions of the tribunals. The Petitioners stated that the dispute escalated to the Environment and Land Court (Embu ELC No. 219 of 2014), which ordered that the suit land be shared equally between the Mugwe Clan and the Ngui Clan. That the Ngui Clan appealed in Nyeri Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2019, contending that the court lacked jurisdiction over land under adjudication, and a consent was entered acknowledging that the ELC had no jurisdiction in such matters.
16. The Petitioners argued that despite the consent filed in the Court of Appeal acknowledging that the Environment and Land Court had no jurisdiction over land under adjudication, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents were now purporting to enforce the decision of the Siakago Land Dispute Tribunal in case No. 35 of 2010 Joel Kithaka Maringa v Samwel Kivuti Ciriba, as contained in a decree dated 04/11/2011, without interrogating the root of the title and in disregard of the processes set out in the Land Adjudication Act. They contended that the Registrar and the Director of Land Adjudication admitted that the suit property was awarded to the Ngui Clan through the impugned Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal.
17. The Petitioners further contended that the 5th Respondent was approbating and reprobating, having participated in litigation for over 20 years seeking to enforce tribunal decisions allegedly made in violation of Cap 284, while simultaneously relying on adjudication records said to date back to 1974. They also asserted that entries made in the title by the 3rd Respondent relied on ELC Case No. 219 of 2014, which was ultimately set aside and were therefore null and void. The Petitioners argued that the actions of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents violated Articles 40 and 47 of the Constitution, infringed their right to property, and breached their right to lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair administrative action, particularly given the advisory opinion by the 1st Respondent stating that the tribunal proceedings were null and void ab initio.
18. They maintained that they had a legitimate expectation that the Respondents would act lawfully and treat them equally before the law, and that the Respondents’ actions were unconstitutional, unlawful, and contrary to the Land Adjudication Act. The Petitioners therefore prayed that the Court grants the orders sought in the Petition.
19. The 1st to 4th Respondents filed submissions dated 07/11/2025 and averred that that the Petition herein lacked merit as their actions were in accordance with their statutory duties under the Land Adjudication Act. They explained that the basis of Land Adjudication in Kenya is the Land Adjudication Act, and the process is initiated once the Minister of Lands has given a declaration that a Trust Land area be adjudicated. That the Minister then appoints an Adjudication Officer who is then expected to steer the process. The Adjudication Officer then appoints demarcation officers, survey officers and recording officers to help administer the process. They averred that the Petitioners in their Petition state that there was an Appeals Board and decisions made by the now defunct Land Dispute Tribunal in Gachoka and Siakago however those offices are not found in the Land Adjudication Act as it only mentions the Arbitration Board.
20. The respondents emphasized that section 21, 22 and 29 set out the process of handling grievances concerning land adjudication which ultimately culminate in a final decision by the Minister of Lands. They highlighted that the High Court retains supervisory jurisdiction over these decisions through judicial review but that there is no provision for the Land Disputes Tribunals under the Act. They averred that, therefore, any proceedings related to adjudicated land before such tribunals are null and void and should be quashed before the adjudication process can properly continue. They urged that the Petition therefore lacks merit.
21. The 5th Respondent submitted that the Petitioners have not disputed key facts, including that Block 148 no longer exists as it was closed and subdivided on 14/11/2024 before the institution of these proceedings, and individual titles were registered to members of the Ngui clan, who had not been joined in this case. They averred that the Ngui clan was recorded as the owner of Block 148 on 10/12/1974 pursuant to section 5 and 19 of the Land Adjudication Act. They averred that the Mugwe clan, previously pursued disputes through Land Disputes Tribunals and courts but admitted they never claimed Block 148 as required by law. They contended that the petitioners are improperly re-litigating the same dispute through a differently framed suit, contrary to the law. They urged that the Petition be dismissed with costs.
22. I have considered the Petition, the Replying affidavits in opposition thereto, the submissions by the parties and the applicable law. The main issue for determination is whether the Petitioners have demonstrated a violation of their constitutional rights arising from the actions of the Respondents, particularly in relation to the decision in Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010 and the subsequent registration of the suit land.
23. It is common ground that the suit land lies within an adjudication section. The law governing rights and interests in such land is the Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284), which provides a comprehensive and exclusive dispute resolution mechanism. That Act does not vest jurisdiction in Land Disputes Tribunals to determine ownership of land under adjudication. Consequently, any proceedings undertaken by such tribunals in respect of adjudication land are a nullity for want of jurisdiction.
24. The record demonstrates that the decision in Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010, together with the decree issued on 04/11/2011, were subsequently set aside by the High Court in H.C.C.A No. 62 of 2009, a position later reaffirmed by the Environment and Land Court in its judgment of 07/02/2019. From the material before the court, the registration and subdivision of the suit land were undertaken pursuant to the adjudication register, which indicated the Ngui Clan as the recorded owners following the adjudication process declared under the Land Adjudication Act. The 1st to 4th Respondents’ actions were therefore grounded on the adjudication records and not on the impugned tribunal decision.
25. In the circumstances, this Court finds that the Petitioners have failed to establish that the Respondents acted unlawfully, unconstitutionally, or in violation of Articles 40 or 47 of the Constitution. The reliance placed by the Petitioners on the decision in Siakago Land Disputes Tribunal Case No. 35 of 2010 is legally untenable, that decision having long been declared a nullity.
26. The Petition therefore lacks merit. It is hereby dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT EMBU THIS 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026.
HON. JUDGE
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
In the presence of;
1.Mr. Kirwa for the Petitioners
2.1st-4th Respondents Advocate absent
3.5th Respondent absent
4.M/S Diana C/A
| Page 12 of 11 |