The respondent was, at all times material to this appeal, a student of the Federal University of Technology, Minna, particularly in the Department of Agric Engineering within the School of Science and Engineering Technology. In May, 2004 she sat, as she claims, for the 2003/2004 First Semester Examination in Chem. III. She claims also that before the examination she signed-in, and later signed-out after the examination. The custom is that no student must leave the examination hall, after the examination, until he had duly submitted his answer sheets, and had mandatorily signed-out.

The results of the said First Semester Examination were later released and pasted at the Notice Board. The result posted showed, clearly, that the respondent got 37 marks for Chem. III. That result was later withdrawn from the Notice Board, and replaced with another result which showed and suggested that she was absent and did not write Chem. III examination. The respondent protested. Her complaints at the Department fell on deaf ears. She persisted. The next thing she got was a letter inviting her to appear before the Students Disciplinary Committee (SDC) for alleged examination misconduct in respect of the same Chem. III. The letter is dated 20th October, 2005. Before then a letter dated 6th October, 2005 had placed her on suspension and informed her, that her case had "been referred to the Students Disciplinary Committee for further investigation" and that she would "remain on suspension until the final determination" of her case. She was thereby "advised to keep-off the campus".

The respondent appeared at the SDC hearing. She was duly informed and given the particulars of the allegation against her. That is: that she did not submit her answer booklet after Chem. III examination, and that the answer booklet was found in the School Examinations Officer's office after 6.00p.m. on the day of the examination, that is: 5th May, 2004. The SDC, in their Report, dismissed the allegation and recommended that the respondent be recalled to continue her studies, having already lost one session.

Notwithstanding the finding and report of the SDC that the allegation of examination malpractice against the respondent was not established, the University, the 1st appellant, went ahead to issue, on 22nd December, 2005, a letter expelling the respondent from the University. She appealed the expulsion from the university but heard nothing in response to the appeal and subsequently approached the High Court of Niger State for enforcement of her right to fair hearing, a fundamental right guaranteed by Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution and enforceable under Section 46(1) of the said Constitution, and the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules (FREP). The originating motion was supported by an affidavit and 6 exhibits. The appellants did not file any counter-affidavit joining issues with the respondent on all the facts constituting the cause of action of the respondent against them.

The trial court (coram: M.S. Zukogi, J.) dismissed the respondent's case. The Court of Appeal (the lower court), on the appeal of the respondent, allowed the appeal and declared null and void the suspension and expulsion of the respondent from the University