The National Industrial Court sitting in Akure has ordered Osun State Government to review the promotion of Mr Olabisi Abidemi to the post of Director on Grade Level 17.
The court also held that the decision not to promote him was unfair and contrary to the principles of public administration.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Kiyersohot Damulak, the court ordered the Governor of Osun State, the Attorney General, the Head of Service and the State Civil Service Commission to review Abidemi’s candidature in accordance with the Osun State Public Service Rules.
The court ordered that any promotion resulting from the reconsideration should take effect from the date it should have been effected and awarded N500,000 as the cost of the action in favour of the claimant.
According to court records, “Abidemi joined the Osun State Civil Service in May 2004 and was promoted to the position of Deputy Director on Grade Level 16 in July 2021.”
The claimant testified in court that he was on an approved leave of absence but his name was listed among officers due for promotion interview to Grade Level 17 in August 2025, and he participated in the exercise.
After the interview he waited for the outcome but received no communication regarding his promotion status, prompting him to write complaint and appeal letters to the Head of Service, Abidemi also stated.
But in their defence, the Governor of Osun State and other defendants claimed that “Abidemi was not denied promotion on account of his leave of absence but was denied promotion because he did not satisfy requirements under the Osun State Public Service Rules, particularly on continuous supervision by a reporting officer and annual performance evaluation reports for four years.”
They further argued that “Abidemi had served the Osun State Civil Service for a period of only about eight months in the last eight years and that officers on leave of absence are not under the supervision of reporting officers during such periods.”
I. A. Mikaheel, counsel for the claimant, argued that the Public Service Rules and the approval for his client’s leave of absence did not stipulate that such leave could be a basis for denying promotion.
In delivering judgment, Justice Damulak held that “although promotion is not an automatic right, the discretion exercised by public authorities in statutory employment matters must be fair, transparent, consistent and in accordance with established rules.”
The court noted that “there was no written policy offered by the defendants that required a reporting officer to supervise an officer for four years before a promotion could be considered.”
It also noted that no report of the promotion committee, recommendation or documentary explanation for the claimant’s exclusion was presented before the court.
“I therefore find that the defendants acted inconsistently and unfairly in refusing to consider the claimant for promotion after listing him as eligible for promotion,” Justice Damulak said.
The court also stated that Abidemi had earlier been promoted to Grade Level 16 while on leave of absence, and that his subsequent shortlisting for the 2025 interview created a legitimate expectation that the leave would not automatically disqualify him from promotion consideration.
