Home » Literacy » Fired UZ Pro-Vice Chancellor to Be Re-Instated

THE University of Zimbabwe (UZ) has been ordered by the Labour Court to re-instate without loss of salary and benefits acting pro-vice chancellor for one of the institution’s colleges who was unfairly dismissed in 2012.The Labour Court, last week, ruled in favour of Lovemore Gwanzura, who had been fired without due process from the position of acting pro-vice chancellor at the UZ’s Marondera College of Agriculture Science and Technology by the university council chairperson, Ambassador Buzwani Donald Mothobi working on the purported instructions of vice chancellor, Levi Nyagura.

The court’s ruling was granted in default by Judge Lilian Hove, after the respondents did not make an appearance.

Gwanzura cited Nyagura and Mothobi as first and second respondents respectively. He also cited the UZ Council as third respondent and the UZ as the fourth.

According to Gwanzura, after acting for three months as pro-vice chancellor of the Agriculture and Technology College, his initial three months contract which had been said would be renewed upon satisfactory performance was indeed renewed.

But only 12 days into the new three months’ contract, Nyagura called him and in a fit of angry accusations dismissed him on the spot, before forcibly demanding that he, Gwanzura, return the company vehicle which had been given him by the institution as per their contractual agreement.

He filed the matter with the courts in 2012 and two years later, last week, won the case.

In his case, he claimed that his dismissal from the position was unilateral and unwarranted.

Part of the ruling read, “The first, second, third and fourth respondents be and are hereby ordered to re-instate the applicant to his post as acting pro-vice chancellor of the University of Zimbabwe Marondera College of Agriculture Science and Technology without loss of salary and benefits with effect from 22nd October 2012.”

“In the event that re-instatement is no longer tenable,” the judgement went on, “the respondents be and are hereby ordered to pay the applicant damages in lieu of re-instatement which damages are to be agreed between the parties or quantified by the court.”

The respondents were also ordered to bear applicants’ costs of the lawsuit on the ordinary scale.

Source : Financial Gazette