• The student had filed a judicial review application seeking orders to restrain the university from sending him home and stopping him from completing his teaching practice.
A fourth year student has failed to block Egerton University from expelling him after he was found guilty of theft and possessing bhang at the institution.
High Court judge Joel Ngugi on Friday ruled that Okwani David's application lacked merit.
The student had filed a judicial review application seeking orders to restrain the university from sending him home and stopping him from completing his teaching practice.
He also wanted an order to quash the decision of the university made on May 7, 2009 and January 2011.
"I'm unable to come to the conclusion that on the available evidence the decision by the disciplinary committee, Senate and Grievances Handling and Appeals Committee met the standard of 'Wednesbury unreasonableness': that it was if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable person or tribunal acting reasonably could have made it," the judge said in his ruling.
"The result is that I find the judicial review application wholly unmeritorious and I, hereby, dismiss it with costs."
In the suit, Okwani said that while he was doing his teaching practice at Cardinal Otunga High School, he was informed that he needed to get in touch with the university.
When he did, he was given an expulsion letter. Okwani said it came as a surprise to him because he was not given a hearing.
"The expulsion was based on an abuse of power, irrelevant considerations, unreasonableness, breach of constitutional rights, breach of natural rules of natal justice, bad faith, beyond the university mandate and in breach of his legitimate expectation of completing his studies and graduating," he said.
Okwani argued that he received a letter dated June 15, 2009, informing him that he had been expelled because he had been found “guilty” of theft, possession of bhang and illegal occupation of a university house.
Okwani claimed that his appeal to the institution in accordance with the University Rules and Regulations was dismissed.
He argued that the hearing was unfair because the university did not consider the two letters he submitted on appeal: a letter dated June 25, 2009, by Monicah Wanjiru Muroki and a letter by Charles Choti.
He says that these two letters exonerate from the charges of theft and illegal occupation of a university house.
He also argued that the decision to expel him was in breach of the rules of natural justice because it was not based on evidence and “was clearly a predetermined issue”.
Okwani submitted that looking at the proceedings, it is not clear why the statements by Choti and Muroki were not taken into account in coming to a conclusion on the charges.
He argued that it was evident that the University was not impartial when making its decision.
He also contested the manner in which he was found responsible for the bhang recovered from the house in which he was living in the absence of evidence by his roommate Hillary Michira.
He wanted to given the benefit of doubt whether the bhang actually belonged to him.
He also said his legitimate expectation to finish his course of study was shattered by the university. His arguments in this regard are the same as those made in urging the other two grounds.
However, the University strongly opposed the application.
It argued that the orders of certification could not be granted because the application was time barred and the decision to expel Okwani was made on May 7, 2009, yet the application was first brought on March 22, 2011, well outside the period stipulated by Order 53 Rule 2 (which is six months).