Appeal Court reserves judgment in Oyo LG leadership tussle suit

court

The Court of Appeal sitting in Ibadan on Wednesday reserved judgment in a suit filed by the Oyo government challenging a court order not to dissolve the 33 local government chairmen and 35 Local Council Development Areas (LCDA) in the state.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Oyo State Government appealed against the Judgment of the High Court delivered on May 6, 2019 by Justice Aderonke Aderemi ordering the state government not to dissolve the elected 33 chairmen and 35 LCDA in Oyo State.

NAN reports that inspite of the judgment, Gov. Seyi Makinde dissolved the 33 LG chairmen and 35 LCDA in the state immediately after his inauguration on May 29,2019. and appealed against the judgment.

The three-member panel of appeal judges chaired by Justice Jimi Bada on Wednesday, reserved the judgment after hearing arguments of counsel in the suit.

Bada further said that judgment date would be communicated to the respective counsel.

Earlier in his argument, counsel to the Oyo State Government, Kunel Kalejaye, SAN, said the lower court has not jurisdiction to here the case because it was premature as at the time the case was filed.

Kalejaye said that the chairmen filed the suit at the lower court based on a rumour they heard that Makinde would dissolved them after his swearing-in on May 29,2019.

He said that the case was filed at the lower court and judgment obtained by the respondents before they were disolved.

Kalejaye urged the court to dismiss the judgment of the lower court and uphold the appeal.

In his arguments, Counsel to the respondents, Yusuf Ali, SAN said that the action cannot be termed immature because the law allows a person to approach the court when such person noticed that his right would been threatened.

Ali said that the law always protecting the right of any individual and only an irresponsible person would wait for his eye to be plugged after noticing that such thing was about to happen.

He urged the court dismissed the appeal and uphold the judgment of the lower court to prevent such action from happening in future.