The Employment and Labour Relations Court in Machakos has nullified the appointment of a chief in Mitaboni Location, ruling that the appointee did not meet the minimum academic qualifications required for the position.
In the judgment, the court found that Ms Lea Kalondu Ngutu, who had been appointed chief despite scoring a D- in the Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) examination, fell short of the minimum grade of C (Plain) stipulated under the Revised Scheme of Service for National Government Administrative Officers.
The case was filed by residents Stephen Nzomo Mutua and Anthony Ndonye Mutiso, who challenged the recruitment process conducted by the Ministry of Interior and the Public Service Commission (PSC).
The petitioners argued that Ms Ngutu was shortlisted, interviewed and appointed despite failing to meet the mandatory academic threshold, contrary to constitutional and statutory requirements governing public appointments.
They further contended that the recruitment process lacked transparency and violated principles of integrity, accountability and fair administrative action. According to court documents, they also questioned her selection over candidates who allegedly ranked higher during the interviews.
In her defence, Ms Ngutu argued that academic qualifications should not be the sole measure of merit for public office. She told the court that her experience as an assistant chief and her understanding of local administrative challenges made her suitable for the position.
She maintained that public appointments should take into account competence, experience and practical ability rather than rely exclusively on examination grades.
However, the PSC informed the court that the recruitment process did not comply with the 2015 Revised Scheme of Service, which sets out the minimum qualifications for appointment as chief.
Minimum academic requirements
Court records showed that members of the shortlisting panel had initially agreed to consider only candidates with a KCSE grade of C (Plain) and above.
Despite this, Ms Ngutu was shortlisted, interviewed and recommended for appointment.
The court heard that the recruitment exercise began in 2022 but was later cancelled after authorities discovered that key recommendations required to complete the process were missing.
In its ruling, the court held that academic qualifications are a key component of merit in public service appointments and that mandatory requirements cannot be waived.
While acknowledging Ms Ngutu’s experience as an assistant chief, the judge ruled that experience could not substitute qualifications prescribed for appointment to a higher office.
The court found that appointing a candidate who did not meet the minimum academic requirements violated Article 232(1)(g) of the Constitution, which requires public appointments and promotions to be based on fair competition and merit.
The judge further held that the irregularities in the recruitment process undermined public confidence and raised concerns about whether qualified candidates had been given a fair opportunity to compete for the position.
The court consequently declared Ms Ngutu’s appointment unconstitutional, illegal and null and void.
However, the judge noted that the PSC had already directed the cancellation of the appointment and later conducted a fresh merit-based review of the recruitment process.
Following the review, another candidate was recommended for appointment in a letter dated October 22, 2025.
