Economy

Agency wins Sh20bn JKIA land dispute after 16 years

JKIA1111E

Terminal 1A at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. FILE PHOTO | NMG

geraldandae

Summary

  • The Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) has won a 16-year-old case, in which individuals in Mlolongo had fraudulently acquired Sh20 billion public land belonging to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.
  • The case the agency filed before Environment and Land Court in 2004 against Mlolongo Association and Uungani Settlement Scheme was finally determined last month.

The Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) has won a 16-year-old case, in which individuals in Mlolongo had fraudulently acquired Sh20 billion public land belonging to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport.

The case the agency filed before Environment and Land Court in 2004 against Mlolongo Association and Uungani Settlement Scheme was finally determined last month after a judge ruled that the KAA was the rightful owner of the 200 hectares contested property.

The court found that the title of land registration number 21919 presented by the KAA was valid and that letters of allotment and titles produced by the Uungani Settlement Scheme and Mlolongo Association in support of their claim over 200 hectares were fake.

“It is surprising that Uungani could be allocated land that was already surveyed and included as part of LR No 21919,” said judge S Okong’o.

“It is even more shocking that the Director of Surveys could authorise a survey to be conducted for the purposes of subdividing LR No. 1423 that was already included as part of LR No. 21919 whose deed plan was authenticated and issued by the same Director of Survey.”

The judge observed that it was clear from the submissions that the purported allotment letter issued to Uungani was marred with several illegalities and irregularities.

He said the land that was allocated to the association was acquired by the government for the development of the JKIA.

“The land was, therefore, reserved and set apart for the future development of JKIA and as such was not available for allocation to Uungani or any other person,” he said.

Justice Okong’o said he was not in agreement with the defendants who had argued that once the land was acquired by the government for use by JKIA, the State after giving a portion of it to JKIA for its immediate use could allocate the remainder to private developers.

“The government could not allocate any part of that land for other uses unless the needs of JKIA had been satisfied and JKIA no longer required the land,” he said.