The High Court has directed the immediate reinstatement of Prof Paul Wainaina as Vice Chancellor of Kenyatta University, ruling that his removal from office was unlawful and without basis.
Delivering a decisive judgment, the court not only quashed the university council’s decision to send Prof Wainaina on compulsory leave but also affirmed his rightful return to duty without delay.
The court further clarified that upon the expiry of his current term on January 26, 2026, Prof Wainaina shall continue serving the university as a professor, as he will still be below the retirement age of 75 for academic staff.
The judgment marks a significant win for Prof Wainaina, who had been out of office since April 14, 2024, after the university council, chaired by Dr Ben Chumo, placed him on compulsory leave.
The council cited accumulated sabbatical and annual leave, including 30 months of sabbatical from 2010, 22 days of annual leave, and an additional 30 days of terminal leave, as justification for the action.
Initially, Prof Wainaina was scheduled to resume office in January 2025, but the council extended his leave in December 2024, sparking fresh controversy.
The council went further to initiate the recruitment of a new vice chancellor, a process Prof Wainaina challenged as irregular and in breach of his contractual and legal rights.
In court, Dr Chumo defended the council’s actions, insisting the recruitment was lawful, had been properly undertaken by the Public Service Commission, and did not violate the rules of natural justice. He asked the court to dismiss Prof Wainaina’s petition with costs, terming it baseless.
However, the court rejected these arguments, upholding Prof Wainaina’s claim that he remained the substantive holder of the vice chancellor’s office, and that attempts to replace him contravened previous legal directives.
Prof Wainaina had moved to the Employment and Labour Relations Court on January 30, 2025, seeking his reinstatement, and arguing that due process had not been followed in the decision to sideline him.
He also faulted the council’s move to advertise his position, despite existing court orders that had previously returned him to office.
