Makgata v Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality and Others (686/2025) [2025] ZALMPPHC 108 (3 June 2025)
REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Disciplinary Proceedings — Precautionary Suspension — Applicant's suspension lapsed ex lege — Applicant, a senior manager at Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality, was placed on precautionary suspension on 18 October 2024, with a disciplinary hearing required to commence within three months as per regulation 6(6)(a) of the Local Government: Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers. The hearing did not commence within the stipulated period, leading the Applicant to seek a declaratory order that his suspension had lapsed and an interdict against ongoing disciplinary proceedings. The Municipality contended that the hearing was delayed due to the Applicant's absence. The court held that the suspension lapsed automatically as the hearing did not commence within the required timeframe, and granted the interdict against the disciplinary proceedings pending a review application.
![Makgata v Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality and Others (686/2025) [2025] ZALMPPHC 108 (3 June 2025)](https://junior-counsel-s3.s3.amazonaws.com/media/images/blog_header_51765.2e16d0ba.fill-800x300.png)
Case Note
Mogaramedi Joel Makgata v Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality and Others — 686/2025 — 2025-06-02
Dates, Case No & Neutral Citation
2025-06-02; Case No 686/2025;
Court and Coram
High Court of South Africa, Limpopo Division, Polokwane; Makoti AJ
Reportability
YES
HEADNOTE
Summary
The court ruled that the Applicant's precautionary suspension lapsed automatically due to the Municipality's failure to commence disciplinary proceedings within the stipulated time frame, and granted an interdict against the ongoing disciplinary inquiry.
Held
The Applicant's precautionary suspension has lapsed in terms of regulation 6(6)(a) of the Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers. The Municipality is ordered to allow the Applicant to resume his duties as Municipal Manager and is interdicted from continuing with the disciplinary proceedings.
Cases, Statutes and Texts Cited
Cases: Baloyi v Public Protector and Others; Chirwa v Transnet Limited; Tshabalala v Moqhaka Local Municipality; Apleni v President of the Republic of South Africa; Mgengo v Lekwa-Teemane Local Municipality; Nothnagel v Karoo Hoogland Municipality; Lekabe v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development; Nkosi v Alfred Duma Local Municipality; Jiba v Minister of Justice
Legislation: Local Government: Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers; Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, Act 117 of 1998
THE FACTS
The Applicant, a senior employee of the Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality, was placed on precautionary suspension on 18 October 2024. He challenged the suspension and the Municipality's subsequent disciplinary proceedings, arguing that they were unlawful and violated regulatory provisions.
THE ISSUES
Whether the Applicant's suspension lapsed automatically due to the Municipality's failure to commence disciplinary proceedings within three months, and whether the ongoing disciplinary proceedings should be interdicted.
ANALYSIS
The court found that the Municipality failed to comply with the regulations regarding the timing and location of the disciplinary hearing, which led to the automatic lapse of the Applicant's suspension. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to legal and regulatory frameworks in disciplinary processes.
REMEDY
The court declared that the Applicant's suspension had lapsed, ordered the Municipality to allow him to resume his duties, and interdicted the Municipality from continuing with the disciplinary proceedings.
LEGAL PRINCIPLES
The court reinforced the principle that compliance with statutory regulations is essential in disciplinary proceedings, and that failure to adhere to such regulations can result in the invalidation of disciplinary actions.