A Nairobi court has declined to stop Mandera Governor Mohamed Adan Khalif from building residential flats on land allegedly belonging to a school in Parklands, Nairobi.
The Environment and Land Court ruled that North Highridge Primary School failed to meet the legal threshold for temporary injunctive relief, including presenting sufficient ownership evidence, to justify halting a project already approved by State regulators.
The court dismissed an application by the school’s Board of Management seeking temporary orders to stop construction on the disputed parcel along Sixth Avenue in Parklands. The project is a 10-storey building with 160 residential housing units.
The school filed a suit last September, seeking an injunction to restrain Governor Khalif, his agents and contractors—including Asili Hills Apartments—from excavating or developing the land pending the hearing of the main case.
It also sought orders compelling Nairobi County Government and national agencies to enforce compliance and provide police protection for the site.
The application was supported by affidavits detailing alleged encroachment dating back to 1995, along with correspondence protesting the loss of school land. However, the court highlighted gaps in the evidence presented.
“Looking at the documents the plaintiffs have presented, I note they provided a history of the disputed land but failed to file any documents to support their claim on the suit land,” Justice Christine Ochieng ruled.
The court noted that while the school alleged that there was forgery and illegality in the governor’s title, such claims could only be tested through a full hearing and oral evidence, not at an interim stage. The court also considered approvals issued by regulatory bodies.
Mandera Governor Mohamed Adan Khalif when he appeared before the Senate County Public Accounts Committee at Bunge Tower in Nairobi on August 21, 2025.
Photo credit: Dennis Onsongo | Nation Media Group
It observed that the National Construction Authority confirmed the developer adhered to legal processes and resumed work after initial stoppages.
“Since the first defendant (Khalif) was granted development permission for his land, with the relevant government entities acknowledging this position, I am unable to restrain him from his property,” the judge held.
The court found that the applicants had not established a strong enough prima facie case to justify halting the development at this stage.
“It is trite that injunctive remedies are equitable, and parties seeking them must demonstrate a prima facie case. At this juncture, noting the absence of clear documents supporting the plaintiffs’ claim, I find the injunctive relief sought premature,” Justice Ochieng stated.
The dispute centres on land registered as LR No 209/21526, previously LR No 209/12673, which the school claims forms part of its original property.
Mandera Governor Mohamed Adan Khalif when he appeared before the Senate County Public Accounts Committee at Bunge Tower in Nairobi on August 21, 2025.
Photo credit: Dennis Onsongo | Nation Media Group
Court documents indicate the school’s land initially measured about 2.219 hectares but was allegedly reduced through illegal excisions over the decades, leaving roughly 1.06 hectares.
The school claimed that unknown persons erected fences, set up site offices, and attempted to put up permanent buildings on portions of its land. Administrators say repeated protests to government offices since 2004 failed to stop the process.
Governor Khalif maintains that he lawfully acquired the contested property. Court documents show he purchased the land in February 2021 from Richard Maore Maoka for Sh140 million.
The land was later approved for development, with construction of a multi-storey residential project beginning in 2024 and intensifying in March 2025.
In opposing the injunction, the defendants argued that the school failed to prove ownership of the specific parcel under development.
The court agreed, finding that while the school presented a historical narrative of alleged land loss, it lacked documentary proof linking the disputed title to its registered land.
The court said that injunctive relief is discretionary and requires a strong case. Citing precedent, the judge noted the court must be satisfied that an apparent right has been infringed.
The case will proceed to full hearing, where the court will examine the legality of historical surveys, transfers and titles at the heart of the long-running dispute.
