Anirod Mashanda v Ministry of Home Affairs

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/133/2014
HARARE, 25 FEBRUARY 2014 &
CASE NO LC/H/1029/2012
14 MARCH 2014
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	JUDGMENT NO LC/H/133/2014

HARARE, 25 FEBRUARY 2014 &		CASE NO LC/H/1029/2012

14 MARCH 2014

In the matter between:

ANIROD MASHANDA					APPELLANT

Versus

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS				RESPONDENT

Before The Honourable E Muchawa   :   Judge

The Appellant in person

For the Respondent		M Chimombe (Legal Practitioner)

MUCHAWA J:

This is a matter where the respondent conceded before me that there were procedural irregularities in the manner the disciplinary hearing has been conducted though they did not file any response or heads of argument.

The facts of the matter are that the appellant was employed as processing officer in the Registrar General’s department when he was charged of corruption or dishonesty, including falsifying any document with fraudulent intent and any act or omission which is inconsistent with or prejudicial to the discharge of official duties, including abuse of authority. This was in terms of the Public Service Regulation 2000 as amended. It was alleged that the appellant had accepted a bribe of US$70-00 to issue a client an initial birth certificate without following due process.

A disciplinary hearing was initially held on 16 August 2012 with the appellant in attendance. The hearing was then adjourned to allow for witnesses to be brought. Upon resumption of the hearing on 20 August 2012, the appellant did not turn up and the hearing proceeded in his absence. He was found guilty and discharged from service with effect from 1 December 2012.

The appellant alleges he was not notified of the new date of set down and was therefore denied an opportunity to be heard. His grounds of appeal are:

I was not given the opportunity to be heard or defend myself and I was not notified of the hearing date.

Keys witnesses were not called to testify.

The appellant seeks a reversal or setting aside of the decision of the Disciplinary Authority and a substitution of same with an appropriate order plus costs.

The respondent did show good cause why they did not file a response as they said they had no basis to oppose the appeal due to the concession that there were gross procedural irregularities. I proceeded in terms of r 22 of the Labour Court Rules S I 59/2006 and order as follows:

The appeal be and is hereby granted with costs.

The decision of the Disciplinary Authority dated 27 November 2012 be and is hereby quashed.

The respondent should reinstate the appellant without loss of salary and benefits with effect from 1 December 2012.

Alternatively, in the event that reinstatement is no longer an option, the respondent should pay the appellant damages in lieu of reinstatement, the quantum of which is to be agreed by the parties failing which any of the parties can approach the Court for quantification of same.

Civil Division -A G’s Office, respondent’s legal practitioners