Historic Victory: Prison officer Favianna Gajadhar has won an 18-year legal battle against the Trinidad and Tobago Public Service Commission (PSC), which unlawfully withheld her salary and blocked her return to work after she took maternity and sick leave.
Scathing Ruling: In an unusual immediate oral judgment, the UK-based Privy Council restored a High Court declaration that Gajadhar’s constitutional right to property was breached. Lord Leggatt described the PSC’s conduct as a ‘sorry history’ and an ‘arbitrary exercise of State power.’
Calls for Abolition: Following the ruling, Former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan SC demanded the immediate resignation of the PSC members and called on the Prime Minister to abolish the Commission in the context of wider constitutional reform, labelling it a ‘rubber stamp for unlawful conduct.’
By Prior Beharry
Former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, SC, is calling for the abolition of the Public Service Commission (PSC) and for much-needed wider constitutional reform, after his client emerged victorious in an 18-year legal battle over the Commission’s decision to declare that she had abandoned her job.
Ramlogan made the call on Thursday, days after the United Kingdom-based Privy Council, Trinidad and Tobago’s highest appellate court, ruled in favour of his client, Favianna Gajadhar.
The law lords delivered a stinging condemnation of the PSC’s conduct.
The panel of five Law Lords—comprising Lords Sales, Lloyd-Jones, Leggatt, Snowden, and Lady Simler—delivered a unanimous oral judgment immediately after the hearing at the UK Supreme Court building in London.
Lord Leggatt, who delivered the Board’s ruling, was highly critical of the Commission’s conduct in the protracted litigation, which resulted in Gajadhar being awarded more than $3.5 million in compensation.
“The history of this case is a sorry one, which regrettably does no credit to the Public Service Commission of Trinidad and Tobago,” Lord Leggatt said.
An 18-year legal battle
Gajadhar, who joined the Prison Service in 2000, suffered a back injury and was absent from duty for extended periods between 2004 and 2006. She became pregnant during that period and sought to resume her duties in September 2006, three months after her daughter was born.
However, her supervisor prevented her from returning to work, claiming she had not properly accounted for her periods of absence. Although Gajadhar maintained she had submitted her sick and maternity leave certificates, the PSC declared she had effectively resigned from her post with effect from June 2007.
Gajadhar filed a judicial review claim against the Commission. The High Court and the Court of Appeal ruled in her favour in 2012 and 2014, respectively, ordering the Commission to reconsider its decision.
When the Commission reconsidered the matter in 2017, it upheld its original decision on an entirely new basis, citing an issue with Gajadhar’s maternity leave application under the Maternity Protection Act. The High Court struck this down in 2019, calling it “untenable and grossly unfair,” a decision upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2021.
The PSC subsequently reconsidered the case for a third time and finally reinstated Gajadhar in April 2022. However, she was not paid her outstanding salary and benefits for the previous 15 years, as the PSC attempted to classify her time off as unpaid leave.
In 2023, High Court Judge Frank Seepersad ruled that the PSC had breached Gajadhar’s constitutional rights, awarding her significant compensation. While the Court of Appeal upheld most of Seepersad’s findings, it ruled he was wrong to find that Gajadhar’s constitutional right not to be deprived of property without due process had been breached for the entire period, arguing the delay should only be computed from 2021.
Privy Council overturns appeal court
In determining the final appeal, Lord Leggatt found that the Court of Appeal had relied on an “erroneous premise.”
He noted that Gajadhar was entitled to her salary and benefits for the entire period during which she challenged the PSC’s decisions, all of which had been found to be unlawful.
“It must in the Board’s view follow from acceptance that the claimant was in office from June 2007, and that the decision to treat her as having resigned was null and void ab initio, that she was entitled to be paid salary,” Lord Leggatt ruled.
He added that the withholding of salary for 15 years “was not only unlawful, null and void, but also amounts to an arbitrary exercise of State power.”
Ramlogan calls for resignations
In a statement after the ruling, Ramlogan said that the Commission had cost taxpayers millions of dollars through unfair and illegal decisions.
“It has facilitated and perpetuated discrimination, victimisation, and oppressive conduct towards aggrieved public officers with legitimate grievances,” Ramlogan said.
He said, “It serves no useful purpose because unfortunately, instead of being an independent safeguard to protect public officers, it is nothing more than a rubber stamp for unlawful conduct.”
Ramlogan accused the PSC of turning a blind eye to discrimination and tacitly supporting unfair treatment by backing unjustifiable decisions taken by senior officers.
“It constantly shifts the goalpost for promotions and facilitates the manipulation of the promotion process to favour some to the detriment of others. This is wrong and must stop,” he added.
Noting that the State lost every single case across the 18-year “spiralling myriads of litigations,” Ramlogan argued that basic common sense could have avoided such a grave injustice.
“The PSC is also politically compromised and has failed miserably in its role as an independent safeguard to protect public servants. It operates as though it is a sacred cow and is comfortable in its incompetence, inefficiency, and mismanagement because there are no personal consequences for the Commissioners when they act illegally,” Ramlogan said.
He called out the current members of the PSC by name—Arlene McComie, Joanne Deoraj, Courtenay Williams, Dr Katija Khan, Roger Berkeley, and Dr Helen Williams-Cumberbatch—saying that if they have any integrity, “they should hang their heads in shame and submit their resignation.”
Ramlogan concluded by calling on Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar to urgently review the constitutional necessity, utility, and function of the PSC, declaring it a “colossal failure.”
Gajadhar was represented by Anand Ramlogan SC, Jodie Blackstock, and Katie Lines, instructed by Jared Jagroo of Freedom Law Chambers. The State was represented by Robert Strang, instructed by Camilla Hart of the UK firm Charles Russell Speechlys. Ian Benjamin SC appeared for the PSC in the Court of Appeal.
