Nairobi News

NewsWhat's Hot

Big win for teachers as Supreme Court upholds pay hike


Teachers are set to start earning enhanced basic salary by end of this month.

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to allow a request by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) to suspend a Court of Appeal order directing it to effect a 50 to 60 per cent pay rise.

Supreme Court judges Willy Mutunga, Kalpana Rawal, Jackton Ojwang, Mohamed Ibrahim and Smokin Wanjala, in their ruling, said they had no jurisdiction to hear the application brought before them.

They said the orders were issued by the Court of Appeal which had exercised its powers under the law.

NO JURISDICTION

“In these circumstances, we find that this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an application challenging the exercise of discretion by the Court of Appeal,” ruled the judges.

The TSC had appealed against the pay rise handed to teachers by Mr Justice Nderi of the Labour Court.

 

 

But Court of Appeal judges directed TSC to implement the basic pay increase of between 50 to 60 percent beginning August 1, and continue paying until the appeal is heard and determined.

Court of Appeal judges Mohammed Warsame, Sankale ole Kantai and Jamila Mohammed had also given a condition that failure by the government to comply with the order will lead to an automatic collapse of the appeal before them.

 

It is this directive which made TSC to approach the Supreme Court, where they sought to have the pay orders lifted until their case before the Court of Appeal is concluded.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

TSC , in its application before the Supreme Court, argued that going by the Court of Appeal orders, a sum in excess of Sh17 billion will immediately be required until the next budget to pay the enhanced salaries, yet is doesn’t have the financial resources to pay the same.

The TSC lawyers argued before the Supreme Court judges that further violation of the constitution was perpetuated by the Court of Appeal judges when they directed the government to pay, “yet we had raised reasonable grounds of appeal that the Labour Court’s judgment was unlawful.”