MUNTAKA-COOMAISE, JCA (Delivering the Lead Judgment):
The appellants claimed in their originating summons against the respondents as follows: -
A declaration that there is no provision in Decree No. 48 of 1992 as amended by Decree No. 11 of 1993, that permits or allows the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants, their servants or agents to perform or do all or any of the functions/duties of the 4th defendant specified in section 3(2), 6, 10, 11, 15 and 16 or any other section of Decree No. 48 of 1992, in the absence of the 4th defendant being duly constituted and/or without the approval/ delegation of the 4th defendant; and consequently every action or decision taken by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants which ought to have been taken by the 4th defendant and which were taken by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants in the absenceof the 4th defendant or without the approval or sanction of the 4th defendant between January 1979 - 11th July 2000 A.D; were ultra vires , null and void and of no effect whatso…