- The PS will be in control of the land on behalf of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.
- The disputed property houses twenty, two bedroomed houses occupied by civil servants
It's a big win for the Ethics and Anticorruption Commission (EACC) after they successfully reclaimed a parcel of land illegally awarded to private owners in Nakuru county.
Justice Mwangi Njoroge said the land parcel identified as Nakuru Municipality Blok 5/221 shall be registered in the name of the Permanent Secretary to Treasury.
The PS will be in control of the land on behalf of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.
The land is situated along Maasai Road in Nakuru. It had been planned and reserved for government residential quarters popularly known as St Xavier Estate.
In its case, the EACC produced evidence showing how the land was illegally alienated to one Saleh Chepkole and Titus Kipkemboi.
It was later transferred to two firms—Pembeni Limited and Assurance Company Limited in November 199.
The EACC said former Lands Commissioner Wilson Gachanja played a major part by issuing a letter of allotment that same month despite the fact that the property was reserved for government housing.
The judge in issuing the orders said the Commission successfully demonstrated that the property was illegally alienated and that the issuance of the lease by Gachanja to Chepkole and Kipkemboi was unlawful.
"It is my view that in the absence of a part development plan and owing to the indication that the property is unsurveyed, the Commission has demonstrated that the property was illegally alienated," the Judge ruled.
He subsequently cancelled the registration of lease in favour of the two and the subsequent transfers to Pembeni Limited and Assurance Company Limited.
The Commission had also asked the court to hold Gachanja personally liable for the illegal alienation of the land. But the Judge said the Commission failed to produce any evidence to prove that the former Lands commissioner should be held personally liable.
Gachanja had claimed that the property was available for alienation but never produced any evidence to substantiate his claims.
His defence was that he was acting on the instruction of the President and upon the confirmation by various officers on the ground that indicated that land was available for alienation.
The disputed property houses twenty, two bedroomed houses occupied by civil servants