Plaintiff Alleges Delay Tactics, Highlights Concerning Details
By Achadu Gabriel, Kaduna
Accusations of delay tactics arose following the rescheduling of the pre-trial conference on Monday in a lawsuit against the Presidential Implementation Committee (PIC) of the White Paper on the Commission of Inquiry into the Alienation of Federal Government Property in Kaduna State.
The plaintiff, Comrade Mustapha Yahaya Bida (rtd), former Chairman of the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnic (ASUP), Kaduna Polytechnic chapter, filed the lawsuit in the state high court. He alleges illegal trespassing by land grabbers on his property, despite a court injunction that prohibits such actions.
During the pre-trial conference on Tuesday, the defendant’s counsel, representing PIC, raised concerns over the service of court papers to the second and third defendants, who are agents of the first defendant. The defendant’s counsel argued that these individuals had not been served, a move that the plaintiff claims is a deliberate attempt to delay proceedings.
Speaking to the press after the session, the plaintiff expressed his frustration. “My lawyers were ready for the pre-trial conference today, but PIC’s lawyer raised the issue of the second and third defendants not being served,” he said. “This seems like a deliberate delay tactic. The second defendant is listed on the so-called allocation letter for the land in question, and the third defendant is the one who took me to the State Investigation Bureau (SIB), claiming I denied them access to my property.”
Bida further explained that the claims of the defendants were unfounded. He disputed the allegation that he had two-bedroom boy’s quarters, insisting that what he had was a bedroom attached to his house. He also denied the land grabbers’ claim that they were dealing with virgin land, as this land was federal government property, not up for allocation by PIC.
The plaintiff claimed that the first defendant’s lawyer has consistently dodged attempts to serve the second and third defendants, offering excuses such as being out of town. As a result, the court rescheduled the pre-trial conference to March 4, 2025, as ordered by the presiding judge, Justice E. Andow.
Bida also highlighted a new development where the third defendant, who has not attended any court proceedings, has now sued him in a magistrate court, claiming damages. “This seems to be a deliberate attempt to further delay the case,” he added.
Barrister Solomon Utuwaya, who represents the plaintiff, could not speak to journalists due to time constraints. However, the judge had previously advised the counsel for the defendant to seek an address within the jurisdiction for proper service, in line with the state’s procedural rules.
The first defendant, PIC, has been accused of demolishing parts of Bida’s property despite a court order that restrains such actions. The plaintiff’s counsel noted that the demolition continued in violation of the court’s order. “There was a court order for all parties to maintain the status quo pending the resolution of the case,” he said.
Comrade Bida, who retired in 2024 after 39 years of service, reported that his property at No. 13 Ribadu Road, Unguwan Rimi GRA, Gabasawa, Kaduna, was unlawfully invaded. He alleged that his boy’s quarters and the property’s fence were destroyed, and a new fence was erected, contravening the court’s order.
A Kaduna State High Court had issued an interim injunction to prevent land grabbers from trespassing or making any changes to the property. Additionally, the court instructed the Commissioner of Police in Kaduna and the officers of the Special Investigation Bureau (SIB) to refrain from inviting Bida regarding the property until the matter is resolved.
The situation escalated when Bida was summoned by the SIB, who claimed that part of his property had been allocated to another individual. After police intervention, it was revealed that the land in question was not the boy’s quarters but merely open land.
“The police insisted that Bida allow the land grabbers to begin development, despite evidence to the contrary,” said the plaintiff.
Bida has shown evidence of an offer letter for the property, naming one Saminu Abubakar, who has not been located since the case began. He claimed that other staff members of Kaduna Polytechnic were facing similar challenges and had taken legal action. He believes his pursuit of justice has led to targeted encroachment on his property.
Bida emphasized that he had duly applied for the property, received an offer letter, and paid the necessary fees, including administrative charges and the cost for a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O). He called on the court and relevant stakeholders to protect his property from illegal encroachment.
He also urged for justice to be upheld in this case, which he hopes will serve as a deterrent to other land grabbers and reinforce the rule of law. The recent petition by aggrieved Kadpoly staff to the National Assembly (NASS) alleged that the school’s management was involved in the unlawful sale of school properties for personal gains.
