The University of Education, Winneba has been sued for allowing the Governing Council to operate after its mandate had elapsed.
According to a writ filed by Mr. Supi Kofi Kwayera at the High Court, Winneba on 23rd May 2017, with the University of Education, Winneba as the 1st Respondent and the Minister of Education, Ministry of Education as 2nd Respondents respectively, the continuation of members of the Governing Council in office is a direct breach of Section 8 Act 672.
The writ indicated that in November 2009, a Governing Council of the 1st Respondent was constituted. The said Council was to carry out its functions until its mandate lapsed after two years.
It noted that after the end of the two years, the tenure of the Governing Council was further renewed for two years certain thus its mandate expired in November 2013.
However, the 2nd Respondent failed to constitute a new Governing Council for the 1st Respondent after the mandate of the said Governing Council had lapsed but rather allowed and permitted the defunct Governing Council which had no mandate whatsoever to continue the functions of a properly constituted Governing Council as if same had been properly constituted.
This Mr. Kwayera finds unlawful hence his legal action against the University of Education, Winneba.
Even though the full two years mandate and the extension of the Governing Council had expired, it is still in office awarding huge contracts disregarding procurement procedure to companies of their choice.
The writ mentioned some of the contracts awarded by the Governing Council as Construction of University of Education (Winneba) GUSSS Commercial Centre, Construction of University of Education GUSSS Hostel at Ajumako Campus, Construction of lectures office complex (Winneba campus), Construction of Distance Learning centre and Guest House in Accra and Construction of Distance Learning centre at Sogakope.
The writ stated that the award of contract for the construction of GUSSS Hostel in Winneba at the cost 47,813,639.24 was done without due regard to processes and procedure as required by the Procurement Act.
Again, the applicant, Mr. Kwayera was of the view that the purchase of 8 pickups at the cost of GHc 800,000.00 by the 1st Respondent was without recourse to the procedure as stipulated in Procurement Act and its amendment.
Mr. Kwayera through his Counsel Komla Onny Esq. is seeking declaration that the extension of the mandate of the Governing Council of the 1st Respondent by the 2nd Respondent to stay in office to perform such functions as properly appointed council was in breach of Section 8 Act 672.
A declaration that no authority or institution of state had any power to extend the tenure of a member of the Governing Council unless such extension was in accordance with Act 672.
Again, a declaration that all appointments made by the defunct Governing Council which constituted themselves as Governing Council of the 1st Respondent by virtue of the directives of the 2nd Respondent are null and void and of no legal effect among other declarations.
<<Print>>