Court reinstates Isiolo clerk in setback for Speaker, Assembly board

The Isiolo County Assembly Speaker, Mohammed Koto and the Assembly Service Board have suffered a setback after the High Court temporarily halted their decision to suspend Clerk Salad Gurcha.

Justice Onesmus Makau of the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Nyeri issued the conservatory order pending the determination of a petition filed by Gurcha.

“An order be and is hereby granted, temporarily suspending the respondent’s decision to place the applicant on compulsory leave,” ruled Justice Makau on Tuesday.

Gurcha was suspended on June 16, 2025, over allegations including absenteeism, failure to submit monthly requisitions for April and May to the Controller of Budget, poor coordination of management meetings, and financial irregularities.

In his petition, Gurcha contested the legality of the suspension and alleged that due process was not followed.

“I have already found that the Board, which has the legal mandate to discipline the Clerk, has not sat to initiate a disciplinary process against him,” said the judge, noting procedural concerns.

Gurcha also claimed the suspension was politically motivated, citing pressure to act against his statutory duties.

Court documents further state that he argued the action infringed on his rights under Article 41 of the Constitution, which guarantees fair labour practices.

The court also barred the Speaker and the Board from denying Gurcha access to his office or interfering with his duties.

“An order be and is hereby granted, restraining the Respondents… from ejecting, blocking, denying access into the office and/or otherwise impeding the Petitioner/Applicant from discharging the functions of the Office of Clerk-Isiolo County, pending the hearing and determination of the petition,” the court ruled.

In their response, the Speaker and the Board defended the suspension, citing warning letters issued to Gurcha in 2022 and March 2025, and maintaining that the disciplinary process had only just begun.

“They aver that the petitioner is using the court process to shield himself from the disciplinary process since the disciplinary process has just started, and no decision has been made to terminate his employment,” the judge noted.

Justice Makau ruled that the petition raised arguable issues that required the court’s intervention and found that public interest warranted the issuance of conservatory orders.