The High Court has directed Moi High School Kabarak to immediately readmit a Form Four student who had been sent home following disciplinary action, ordering that the learner return to class by 5 p.m. on Thursday.
In orders issued by Justice John Chigiti, the court instructed the school’s administration to unconditionally readmit the student, identified in court documents as M.L.A., who had reportedly been suspended over possession of an electronic cigarette, commonly known as a vape.
“Respondents are hereby directed to forthwith readmit M.L.A into class unconditionally,” Justice Chigiti ordered.
The directive followed an application challenging the student’s removal from the institution. The court also directed the applicant to file and serve a supplementary affidavit by 5 p.m. on March 12, 2026, while lawyers for both parties were instructed to address the Notice of Preliminary Objection raised in the matter.
The case will be mentioned again on March 18, 2026, when the court will review compliance with its orders and reserve a judgment on the dispute.
Disciplinary action and legal challenge
The dispute arose after school administrators allegedly found the student in possession of an electronic cigarette within the school premises.
In a replying affidavit, the school’s deputy principal in charge of administration, Richard Rono, told the court that the institution received credible reports on February 12, 2026, indicating that the student had brought a vape device into the dormitory.
“The seriousness of the allegation prompted the school administration to initiate disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the school disciplinary framework,” Rono stated.
According to court documents, the student was issued a temporary suspension letter on February 12, requiring him to leave the school pending investigations and return on February 24, 2026, accompanied by a parent for a disciplinary hearing.
During the investigation, the student reportedly wrote an apology letter admitting that he had purchased the vape device near Capital Centre in Nairobi before bringing it to school.
A disciplinary hearing was subsequently held on February 24, attended by members of the school’s disciplinary committee, the student, and his mother.
School challenges court jurisdiction
However, through lawyer Danstan Omari, the student moved to court, arguing that his continued exclusion from school was unlawful and violated his constitutional and statutory right to education.
In response, the school and its Board of Management, represented by lawyers from HS Law Advocates LLP, filed a preliminary objection seeking to have the case dismissed.
The respondents argue that the dispute should have first been presented before the Education Appeals Tribunal, as provided under the Basic Education Act.
“The Applicant has bypassed the statutory framework and improperly invoked the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court,” the respondents stated in court filings.
They further argued that the matter improperly invites the court to determine the merits of the disciplinary decision instead of reviewing the legality of the decision-making process, which they say falls within the scope of judicial review.
The school also contends that the case may have been overtaken by events, claiming the student voluntarily withdrew before the disciplinary process was concluded.
The court will consider submissions from both sides when the case returns for mention on March 18, where further directions are expected.
