The National Industrial Court (NIC) in Abuja has upheld the dismissal of former Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) Deputy Director, Yisa Usman, ruling that his conduct amounted to gross misconduct and willful disobedience that fundamentally undermined the confidence reposed in him by the examination body.
In a judgment delivered on June 2, 2026, Justice Osatohanmwen Obaseki-Osaghae dismissed Usman’s suit challenging his July 2023 dismissal and affirmed that JAMB acted lawfully and in accordance with its staff regulations and applicable public service rules. The court also ordered the former official to pay ₦250,000 as costs.
The case, filed under Suit No. NICN/ABJ/266/2023, stemmed from Usman’s dismissal from the Finance Department of Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board, where he had risen through the ranks from Accountant II after joining the board in 1997 to become Deputy Director.
In the Certified True Copy of the judgment, the court held that the evidence presented by JAMB established multiple acts of misconduct by the claimant.
Justice Obaseki-Osaghae ruled that Usman had repeatedly violated provisions of the Public Service Rules and JAMB’s Staff Manual, including unauthorized absences from duty, refusal to hand over official email passwords belonging to JAMB’s Kogi State office, and undertaking a full-time Master’s degree programme without obtaining the required management approval while still serving as a public officer.
The judge stated: “From the totality of the evidence adduced, I find that the misconduct of the claimant is grave and weighty. He willfully disobeyed constituted authority. This has eroded and undermined the confidence reposed in him by the defendant to carry out his duties.”
The court further relied on established judicial authorities concerning employer-employee relationships, emphasizing that organizations are entitled to discipline employees whose conduct destroys the trust necessary for continued employment.
A major plank of Usman’s case was his claim that he was denied fair hearing before his dismissal.
However, the court found otherwise, noting that JAMB had issued several queries to him and that he had responded extensively in writing. After reviewing his responses, the board invited him to appear before its Directorate Staff Disciplinary Committee for further investigation.
According to the judgment, Usman was given notice to attend the disciplinary proceedings but chose not to appear.
Citing the Supreme Court decision in Imonikhe v. Unity Bank Plc (2011), Justice Obaseki-Osaghae held that the requirement of fair hearing was satisfied once the employee was informed of the allegations and afforded an opportunity to respond.
“The claimant was issued with queries on misconduct and by his own evidence gave detailed responses in writing. The defendant was not satisfied with his response and invited him to appear before the committee. By his own choice, he refused to appear before the disciplinary committee,” the judge held.
She concluded that the disciplinary process met the constitutional and procedural requirements of fair hearing.
Usman had argued that the Directorate Staff Disciplinary Committee that investigated him was improperly constituted because some members were officials against whom he had previously filed complaints and petitions. He maintained that such a panel could not guarantee him impartial treatment.
JAMB, represented by Senior Advocate of Nigeria A. J. Owonikoko, countered that the Registrar and Director of Finance recused themselves before the committee commenced proceedings and that the committee’s composition had earlier received approval from the governing authorities.
The court agreed with JAMB, holding that the committee was lawfully constituted and operated within its powers.
Another issue raised by the claimant was that his dismissal lacked legal backing because JAMB did not have a Governing Board in place at the time, and therefore the Minister of Education could not lawfully approve his dismissal.
The court rejected this argument.
Justice Obaseki-Osaghae observed that the same Minister had approved Usman’s promotion to Deputy Director in 2017 without objection from him. She further held that Section 6 of the JAMB Act empowers the Minister to exercise supervisory authority over the board and approve such actions when a governing board is absent.
“In the absence of a Governing Board, the management seeks directives and approvals from the ministry,” the judge said, adding that ministerial approval of the dismissal was valid and lawful.
Usman had also argued that he was targeted because of several petitions he submitted against senior JAMB officials, including allegations of financial misconduct, procurement violations and abuse of due process. The petitions were sent to agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, the Federal Ministry of Education and other oversight bodies.
The court found no evidence linking the dismissal to whistleblowing activities.
Instead, Justice Obaseki-Osaghae noted that the various anti-corruption agencies investigated the allegations and exonerated the officials concerned, including former JAMB Registrar Ishaq Oloyede. The judge pointed out that Usman himself acknowledged in court documents that the investigations did not substantiate his claims.
“The reasons stated in the dismissal letter are unrelated to his whistleblowing activities,” the court held.
In his suit, Usman sought declarations that the disciplinary process was unlawful, demanded reinstatement to his former position, requested promotion to Director of Finance and Accounts, and sought ₦150 million in exemplary damages for alleged wrongful dismissal.
The court rejected all the reliefs sought.
Justice Obaseki-Osaghae held that the claimant failed to prove any of the allegations upon which his claims were based and ruled that JAMB had successfully justified the reasons for his dismissal.
The judgment brings to a close nearly three years of litigation arising from one of the most closely watched employment disputes involving a senior official of JAMB, reaffirming the authority of public institutions to discipline employees whose conduct is found to violate established service rules and undermine institutional trust.