The High Court in Kericho has certified an urgent constitutional petition challenging the Board of Management of Litein Boys High School for imposing a Kshs. 49,699 levy per student to cover damages from a recent student unrest.
The petition, filed by the public benefit organization Sheria Mtaani, alleges the levy and subsequent staggered readmission of students are unlawful and violate the learners’ right to education. Justice Sergon directed the respondents to file their responses within three days, setting the stage for a swift determination of the case.
According to court documents, the legal action was initiated on October 8, 2025, following a student unrest incident on the evening of September 21, 2025, which resulted in significant property damage and the temporary closure of the school.
The petitioners, Sheria Mtaani and its chairperson Shadrack Wambui, are acting on behalf of parents who, the affidavit states, fear victimization should they challenge the school administration individually.
The petition names the School’s Board of Management, its Chief Principal, the County Director of Education for Kericho, the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC), the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and the Teachers Service Commission as respondents.
The core of the dispute is a directive from the Board of Management requiring each parent to pay Kshs. 49,699, purportedly to cover a total cost of Kshs. 69,578,795 arising from the unrest.
The petitioners contend that this amount, said to be based on a Bill of Quantities of Kshs. 41,929,610 plus additional supplier and teacher claims, lacks transparency. The supporting affidavit sworn by Shadrack Wambui states that despite repeated requests, “no independent valuation report, verified assessment, detailed asset inventory, or itemized breakdown was provided to substantiate the figures claimed.”
Further compounding the issue, the school management made readmission conditional upon full payment of the levy, implementing a staggered schedule: Form Two students on October 9, Form Three on October 13, and Form Four on October 16, 2025.
The petitioners argue that this approach is particularly detrimental to Form Four candidates, who are scheduled to begin their Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) examinations on October 21, 2025. The petition states that the delay in readmission “gravely undermines their preparation and violates their constitutional right to education.”
The petitioners also highlight a threat by the school administration to de-register Litein Boys High School as a KNEC examination center. They argue that such a move would be a disproportionate punishment that unfairly targets innocent students.
In a Parents Teachers Association (PTA) meeting on October 7, 2025, parents proposed a compromise contribution of Kshs. 10,000 per student. However, the petition alleges this proposal was “summarily rejected” by the school’s Board and Principal without reasoned justification.
The legal filing cites multiple alleged violations of the Constitution, including the right to education under Articles 43(1)(f) and 53(1)(b), the right to fair administrative action under Article 47, and the principle that a child’s best interests are of paramount importance under Article 53(2). It also invokes provisions of the Basic Education Act, which prohibits denying a child education for non-payment of fees.
In his directions issued on October 13, 2025, Justice Sergon certified the petition as urgent and gave the respondents three days to file their responses after being served. The court ordered that the petition be disposed of through written submissions within seven days thereafter and scheduled a mention for October 23, 2025, to fix a judgment date.
This is not the first incident of student unrest at Litein Boys High School, with the petition noting it was the third such occurrence in recent years, pointing to persistent governance and welfare issues. The case tests the limits of school administrations’ power to levy parents for damages and the constitutional safeguards protecting students’ access to education.
