Shamiso Chigabo v Minister of Primary & Secondary Education

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/130/2020
HARARE, 22 NOVEMBER 2018, 2020
CASE NO. LC/H/342/17
---------


IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	     JUDGMENT NO. LC/H/130/2020

HARARE, 22 NOVEMBER 2018, 2020              CASE NO. LC/H/342/17

AND 19 JUNE, 2020

SHAMISO CHIGABO								Appellant

MINISTER OF PRIMARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION			Respondent

Before The Honourables  G . Musariri & B. Chivizhe Judges

For Appellant	:			Mr E. Ndlovu, Attorney

For Respondent:				Mr T. Shumba, Officer

MUSARIRI J:

Appellant worked for Respondent as a Headmistress at Dzivarasekwa in Harare. She was transferred to another school. An audit was conducted which led to charges of misconduct being leveled against her. A hearing was held which found her guilty of misconduct. As a result, she was dismissed from employment by Respondent. She then appealed to this Court against her dismissal. Appellant faced a number of charges. Her argument in this Court was that Respondent failed to prove its case against her. In essence she sought to have this Court give its determination on the evidence on record.

It is not for this Court to second-guess the disciplinary authority. The task of the Court is to check whether the authority’s decision is consistent with the facts and probabilities. That is a different thing from the Court giving its own opinion of evidence available.

The disciplinary authority’s determination is embodied in its letter to Appellant dated the 10th October 2016. A copy is filed of record. The determination noted the various counts of misconduct. They included: collection of rentals which were not accountable for: violation of procurement procedures, a US$1,500-00 claim for attendance at a conference in Mutare which Appellant did not attend; and payments amounting to US$6 245-00 without supporting documents.

A copy of the audit report dated 15th October 2014 is filed of record. It confirmed the flouting of tender procedures in these terms.

“2.1.1. Audit noted that in some cases the school was directly purchasing from preferred suppliers in violation of the procurement procedures and regulations without sourcing at least three quotations on competitive tender as required by procurement procedures and regulations. The former School Head (Appellant) was authorizing some of these payments alone without the involvement of the School Development Committee members and at the same time she was the recipient of the funds.”

The audit chronicles a litany of financial misconducts. It addition it was alleged that Appellant claimed $1,500-00 for a conference in Mutare which apparently she did not attend. There was evidence that she was engaged with Zimsec examinations in Harare at the same time. The claim was probably fraudulent.

I highlighted a few of the misconducts to show that Respondent’s determination was supported by findings of an audit. The determination cannot therefore be said to be grossly erroneous. Appellant did not show such gross error. Her notice of appeal sets out a series of alleged errors. It does not even allege gross error. What  she effectively sought was a re-trial of the matter by this Court. Well she fell in error. Her task was to show gross error in the deliberation/determination by Respondent. Her failure to show gross error has fatal consequences to her appeal to this Court.

Wherefore it is ordered that;

1.	The appeal be and is hereby dismissed.

2.	Each party shall bear its own costs.

G. MUSARIRI

JUDGE

I agree,					B. CHIVIZHE

JUDGE