The case of the Plaintiff, (who is now the Respondent) in the High Court of Oyo State holden in Ibadan, is that he was employed as a clerical officer by the Defendant (who is now the Appellant), in 1974. He was appointed an Assistant Secretary in 1981, after obtaining a degree on study leave without pay between 1977 and 1980, and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Assistant Secretary I, a post in which his duties included disbursement of money. In 1986 he was given a query by the management of the Defendant for alleged irregularities in the disbursement of cash advance granted to him. A sub-committee was set up to investigate the irregularities, and he made written memorandum, which the committee considered, and recommended that the Plaintiff be warned. In 1987, a Ministerial Administrative panel of Inquiry into the affairs of the Defendant visited the Defendant, and the 1986 irregularities were again raised before the panel and the Plaintiff was invited again to defend himself, and he submitted a written memorandum to the allegations against him for which he had already been punished in 1986. At the end of the investigation the Plaintiff was dismissed, vide a letter of 5th October 1988, and according to him the dismissal was illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void. The Plaintiff, stated that he had been searching for alternative job to mitigate the sufferings brought by his dismissal, but to no avail. The reliefs sought by the Plaintiff were as follows:-

In its statement of defence the Defendant denied some of the allegations above, but admitted some to the extent that the Plaintiff was eventually dismissed, in 1988, but that the earlier investigation of 1986 was not conclusive, and so the Plaintiff's promotion was deferred. In view of this, the Plaintiff's matter was investigated by a Ministerial Panel of Inquiry in 1987, as the first and only panel or body to sit on the allegation against the Plaintiff. The Defendant has stated that the Plaintiff has since his dismissal been gainfully engaged in trading activities to wit he has bagged contracts of supply from the Defendant.

On completion of pleadings, evidence were adduced, and they were evaluated by the learned trial Judge, who at the end of the day found in favour of the Plaintiff, and granted the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal on several grounds of appeal. The appeal was dismissed, and the Defendant has appealed to this Court.