The case leading to this appeal, commenced at the Benue State High Court sitting at Makurdi under the Fundamental Human Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 1979 wherein, the Appellant sought leave to apply for a Judicial Review, to wit: Orders of Certiorari, Mandamus and Prohibition against the Respondents. The case was canvassed on affidavit evidence and at the end, the learned trial Judge, - Ahura, J. in his ruling dated 16th June, 2000, dismissed the application. The Appellant's appeal to the Court of Appeal (herein called "the Court below"), was dismissed hence the instant, appeal.

The facts of the case briefly stated, are that the Appellant in the 1993/1994 Academic Session, was admitted by the 1st Respondent, to do an M.Sc. Degree in Agricultural Economics. As part of the M.Sc programme, the Appellant was required to write/submit an acceptable thesis. A topic for the thesis, was chosen and duly approved. The Degree awarding Authority, is the Senate of the University i.e. the 2nd Respondent.

The Appellant was given two (2) Supervisors, namely. Dr. G.B. Ayoola as the Major Supervisor and Dr. J.C. Umeh an Associate Professor with the 1st Respondent, as the Internal Examiner. The External Examiner of the Appellant was Prof. J.O. Olukosi of the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria. According to the Masters degree Programme, the Appellant's thesis, must be attested by an External as well as an Internal examiner. Prof. M.C. Njike, was the Dean of Post graduate School in the 1st Respondent's employment.

“In my opinion since the plaintiff was able to produced five tentative male witnesses who confirmed it before this court that the disputed property (farm land) is his father’s own and that the defendant’s father only possessed it by way of manipulation (Hauzi). This court hold the view that whenever there is ownership, possession will have no position in Sharia, no matter whatever longer period stood. Therefore considering all the facts stated above I hereby confirmed the subject matter of this case (farm land) to the plaintiff since it was known to be his late father’s property. This is in accordance with Tuhfa vol. 11 page 172”.

The Appellant, submitted his thesis to the Board of Examiners comprising the above-named gentlemen/personalities who invited the Appellant to defend his thesis orally, which he did. Thereafter, the Panel/Board, recommended in Exh. 3 at page 14 of the Records, inter alia, thus:

As a result of the Report submitted to it on the Appellant's corrected thesis, the 2nd Respondent, rejected the said thesis and advised the Appellant to withdraw from the University with immediate effect and asked him to hand-over certain items/property of the University in his possession to the Acting Dean of Students Affairs before he leaves the Campus. In its letter of "withdrawal" to the Appellant - Exh. 6, the 2nd Respondent, gave its reason for its said decision.