By Lukman Olabiyi
Otunba Nurudeen Aina aka, Alowonle, has dragged Ogun State Government and others before the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN), Ibadan, to declare him the authentic chairman of the incorporated Motorcycle Owners and Riders Association of Ogun State (AMORAN).
He wants the court to nullify the swearing of the Otunba Taofeek Sokoya as chairman, as he noted that the office of the chairman was not vacant and that Sokoya did not hold any executive office.
The claimant in the Originating Summons filed by his counsel, Mr Bamidele Ogundele of Castle of Justice Chambers, is praying the court to declare that Sokoya is not the proper person to be sworn in as acting chairman in the absence of the applicant who was on leave of absence for four months.
He therefore, filed the suit marked NICN/IB/07/2025 against the incorporated trustees of incorporated Motorcycle Owners and Riders Association of Ogun State (AMORAN), the Governor of Ogun State,
Attorney General of Ogun State and Commissioner for Justice, Commissioner for Transport Ogun State, Otunba Taofeek Sokoya (a.k.a Danku) as first to fifth respondents respectively.
His Originating summons was brought pursuant to Order 3 Rule 3 of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Civil Procedure Rules, 2017 and section 254(C) of the of 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.
And also the Section 9(C), 10,11,14(1)&(2) of the Constitution of the incorporated Trustees of Articulate Trust Motorcycle Owners & Riders Association (AMORAN).
Aina is praying the court for an order declaring that there is no any vacancy in the office of the applicant to warrant the fifth respondent being sworn in by virtue of provisions of Section 16(a)&(b) of the 1st respondent Constitution.
He is also therefore praying for an order of the court to restrain Sokoya, the fifth respondent from parading himself as the chairman of the association.
“An order of the court mandating the 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents as regulatory authorities to recognise the applicant as the legal and lawful chairman of the first respondent.
“Applicant is not the legal chairman of the 1st respondent association by virtue of the fact that his term of office tenure is three years that expired by September, 2026 and still subsisting.”
He further stated that the 5th respondent did not occupy any of executive position/offices listed in Section 9(a)&(b) of the Constitution of the 1st respondent.
“That upon the expiration of the leave of absence, the applicant automatically revert to the position of chairman of the lat respondent, while the acting chairman reverts back to the position of vice chairman.
“That the applicant’s return to the position as chairman on the December 4, 2024 is still within the applicant’s second term as the lawfully elected chairman of the first respondent”
He prayed the court to restrain the fifth respondent from parading himself as the chairman of the first respondent.