By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

proceed by way certiorari. He can file an ordinary civil suit as in the instant case,with respect therefore, the learned trial judge was in error in holding a contraryview. We wish to add that, in any event, the learned judge’s view cannot be rightbecause proceedings in an application for certiorari would also be a civilproceeding and so also excluded under section 28 if his argument were right.We now wish to turn to the interpretation of Section 28 of the security ofEmployment Act about the extent to which the jurisdiction of courts is ousted.The substantive merits of a ministerial decision under the Act cannot be goneinto in a court of law. This is the import of both Section 27 and 28. Among thethings that can be examined is whether the rules of natural justice wereobserved, which would in turn determine whether there was a valid decision, ifyou like a real decisions at all.In the instant matter the appellant complained, and is still complaining that therespondent did not follow the procedure set out under section 43 provides:.“ the parvies to a reference to the Minister shall be entitled to submit meranda insupport of their respective oases but shall not be entitled to appear in person orby advocate or other representative before him”.In the plain the appellant contended that there was injustice and the respondenthas denied this. The learned trial judge appeared to agree that there might havebeen injustice but his view was that the only way to bring up the matter was by521