Napo Seema V Director-National Manpower Development Secretariat & 5 Others (CV of A (CIV) No.33/2025) [2025] LSCA 60 (7 November 2025)

# Napo Seema V Director-National Manpower Development Secretariat & 5 Others (CV of A (CIV) No.33/2025) [2025] LSCA 60 (7 November 2025) [ __](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07) [ __](mailto:?subject=Take a look at this document from LesLII: Napo Seema V Director-National Manpower Development Secretariat …&body=https://lesotholii.org/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07) [ Download PDF (219.3 KB) ](/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07/source) Report a problem __ * Share * [ Download PDF (219.3 KB) ](/akn/ls/judgment/lsca/2025/60/eng@2025-11-07/source) * * * * * Report a problem __ ##### Napo Seema V Director-National Manpower Development Secretariat & 5 Others (CV of A (CIV) No.33/2025) [2025] LSCA 60 (7 November 2025) Copy citation * __Document detail * __Related documents Citation Napo Seema V Director-National Manpower Development Secretariat & 5 Others (CV of A (CIV) No.33/2025) [2025] LSCA 60 (7 November 2025) Copy Media Neutral Citation [2025] LSCA 60 Copy Hearing date 21 October 2025 Court [Court of Appeal](/judgments/LSCA/) Case number CV of A (CIV) No.33/2025 Judges [Dr. Mosito P](/judgments/all/?judges=Dr.%20Mosito%20P), [Sakoane CJ](/judgments/all/?judges=Sakoane%20CJ), [Van der Westhuizen AJA](/judgments/all/?judges=Van%20der%20Westhuizen%20AJA) Judgment date 7 November 2025 Language English ##### __Collections * [Case indexes](/taxonomy/case-indexes) * [Commercial](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial) * [Administrative Law](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial-administrative-law) * [Public Service](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial-administrative-law-public-service) * [Public Officer](/taxonomy/case-indexes/case-indexes-commercial-administrative-law-public-service-public-officer) Summary ###### Flynote Administrative Law — Public Service — Study leave as prerequisite for state sponsorship — Loan Bursary Agreement — Withdrawal from study leave — Whether withdrawal from study leave automatically terminates bursary agreement — Whether NMDS obliged to continue sponsorship notwithstanding return to duty — Good cause for revocation. Read full summary * * * Skip to document content ###### Flynote Administrative Law — Public Service — Study leave as prerequisite for state sponsorship — Loan Bursary Agreement — Withdrawal from study leave — Whether withdrawal from study leave automatically terminates bursary agreement — Whether NMDS obliged to continue sponsorship notwithstanding return to duty — Good cause for revocation. 1 LESOTHO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO HELD IN MASERU C OF A (CIV) NO.33/2025 In the matter between: NAPO SEEMA APPELLANT AND DIRECTOR – NATIONAL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT 1ST RESPONDENT NATIONAL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT 2ND RESPONDENT NATIONAL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 3RD RESPONDENT PRINCIPAL SECRETARY – MINISTRY OF EDUCATION 4TH RESPONDENT MINISTER OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING 5TH RESPONDENT ATTORNEY GENERAL 6TH RESPONDENT CORAM: MOSITO P SAKOANE CJ VAN DER WESTHUIZEN AJA 2 HEARD: 21 OCTOBER 2025 DELIVERED: 7 NOVEMBER 2025 FLYNOTE Administrative Law — Public Service — Study leave as prerequisite for state sponsorship — Loan Bursary Agreement — Withdrawal from study leave — Whether withdrawal from study leave automatically terminates bursary agreement — Whether NMDS obliged to continue sponsorship notwithstanding return to duty — Good cause for revocation. The appellant, a public officer, had been granted study leave and a loan bursary by the National Manpower Development Secretariat (“NMDS”) to pursue a four-year degree programme. Two years into the programme, he notified his Ministry that, due to family circumstances, he was withdrawing from study and resuming duty. The Ministry duly notified NMDS, and the study leave was formally terminated. NMDS thereupon ceased sponsorship on the footing that the appellant was no longer engaged in full-time study. The appellant sued, seeking reinstatement of the Loan Bursary Agreement and payment of tuition and allowances. The High Court dismissed the claim, holding that study leave was a sine qua non for sponsorship; once the appellant voluntarily withdrew and returned to work, the foundational basis of the bursary fell away. On appeal, the appellant contended that cancellation of study leave did not ipso facto cancel the bursary; that NMDS lacked authority to treat his withdrawal as a breach; and that withdrawal from study leave was not a stipulated ground for termination of the Agreement. Held, dismissing the appeal, that the regulatory framework requires public officers to obtain and maintain study leave in order to pursue full-time studies; proceeding without such leave constitutes desertion. NMDS, as part of Government, is not to be deceived into funding persons no longer in full-time study. By voluntarily terminating study leave and resuming duty, the appellant 3 negated the essential condition for sponsorship and breached his contractual undertaking to attend and complete study. Notification by the employer to NMDS constituted good cause under clause 5 of the Agreement for its revocation. It would be contrary to public interest and wasteful of public funds to compel continued sponsorship where study has ceased. Appeal dismissed with costs. JUDGMENT SAKOANE CJ: Background Facts [1] The appellant is a public officer in the employ of the Ministry of Home Affairs. In August 2018 he applied for and was granted a bursary to study at the National University of Lesotho by National Manpower Development Secretariat (NMDS). [2] On 5 September 2021, the appellant wrote a letter to the Principal Secretary of the Ministry which reads: “Dear Sir, Re: Withdrawal from Study Leave I Napo Seema, a clerical assistant officer in the Ministry of Home Affairs humbly wish to inform your good office that I have decided to withdraw from my study leave for the 2021/2022 academic year. I was given an opportunity by the Ministry to attend (sic) a study leave for a period of 4 years but due to unplanned family matters that came on my way I have to quit the offer and return to my position as a clerical assistant officer. Thanks for the valuable offer I have received from the ministry for this period of 2 years I have been out of the office. 4 Looking for(sic) your usual cooperation. Yours sincere (sic) Napo Seema.” [3] On 28 September, the Director of Human Resources Home Affairs wrote to the Director - NMDS making him aware of the appellant’s letter of withdrawal from study. The letter was attached. The letter of the Director Human Resources Home Affairs concluded thus: “As is policy, your good office is requested to act accordingly as one of the requirements of a serving officer to be granted sponsorship is study leave which in this regard is being terminated.” [4] On 1 November, the Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Public Service wrote a letter to his counterpart at Home Affairs referencing the letter of Director Human Resource Home Affairs of 28 September to Director NMDS. In his letter, the Principal Secretary Public Service said: “Kindly be informed that we have noted your Ministry’s request to terminate study leave of the above mentioned officer who was granted study leave to pursue Bachelor of Humanities with National University of Lesotho from August, 2018 to July, 2022. Therefore, termination of study leave is granted due to unplanned family crises which caused Mr. Napo to come to the decision to withdraw from his studies for the 2021/2022 academic year. Cc: ACGEN AUDIT 5 NMDS” [5] On 8 November the Principal of the Ministry of Home Affairs wrote to the appellant saying: “We wish to inform you that the Ministry of the Public Service has approved your request to terminate your study leave due to unforeseen circumstances with effect from 01st November, 2021. You are requested to report on duty on the 16th November 2021. CC: NMDS” Appellant’s claim [6] On 12 April 2022, the appellant issued summons to the respondents claiming: “(a) an order directing the defendants (in particular the 2nd defendant) to reinstate the Loan Bursary Agreement with the plaintiff. (b) an order directing the defendants (in particular the 2nd defendant) to comply with and perform its obligations under the Loan Bursary Agreement with the plaintiff. (c) an order directing the defendants (in particular the 2nd defendant) to pay the plaintiff’s tuition, allowances, disbursements and expenditures for the purpose of, or in connection with his course at the National University of Lesotho. (d) Costs of suit. (e) Further and/or alternative relief.” [7] In their plea, the respondents denied that the Loan Bursary Agreement was breached in the manner alleged or at all. In essence, the plea was that the termination of the Agreement was a consequence of the appellant’s withdrawal from and termination of study leave and return to work. 6 Dismissal of the claim [8] After hearing evidence, Kopo J dismissed the claim. In his judgment the learned Judge, found as follows: 8.1 study leave is a sine qua non for concluding a Loan Bursary Agreement with public officers; 8.2 study leave ensures that the student attends classes fulltime. 8.3 withdrawal of study leave is a negation of the sine qua non for grant of a loan bursary; i.e if no study leave, no sponsorship; 8.4 cancellation of study leave by the appellant led to cancellation of the Loan Bursary Agreement. Grounds of appeal [9] The appellant appeals on the following grounds: “ -1- The Honourable Court a quo erred and misdirected itself in law by concluding that when the appellant cancelled his Study Leave he automatically cancelled his Loan Bursary Agreement with the 2nd respondent. -2- The Honourable Court a quo erred and misdirected itself in law by concluding that the Study Leave was a condition sine qua non for the Loan Bursary Agreement between the appellant and the 2nd respondent. -3- The Honourable Court a quo erred and misdirected itself in law by not finding that the appellant did not commit any act that called for the termination of the Loan Bursary Agreement between the appellant and the 2nd respondent.” 7 Submissions [10] Counsel for the appellant submitted that the cancellation of the Loan Bursary Agreement is unlawful for the following reasons: 10.1 the appellant never informed NMDS that he had withdrawn his study leave; 10.2 withdrawal of the study leave is a matter between the appellant and the employer in which NMDS has no colour of right to use the withdrawal as a reason to breach the Agreement; and 10.3 withdrawal of a study leave is not one of the stipulated grounds for termination of the Loan Bursary Agreement. Discussion [11] Regulations 96 of the Public Service Regulations, 2008 spells out the procedure and necessity for a study leave: “Study leave for training and development 96\. (1) A public officer may apply for study leave for a long-term training if the officer has satisfactorily completed his or her 12 months probationary period and is confirmed in appointment. (2) Long-term training shall be in line with the officer’s career development and the needs of the ministry, department or agency he or she is working for. (3) The officer intending to go on study leave shall make an application to the Head of Department of his or her ministry who shall seek concurrence of the relevant Minister. (4) Where the Minister responsible for the relevant ministry has concurred, the application shall be submitted to the Minister for approval. 8 (5) A public officer who is aged 50 years and above is eligible for study leave if the officer shall be able to serve his or her bonding agreement. (6) A contract officer is only eligible for short term and part-time training on approval by the Minister. (7) A public officer who proceeds on study leave before his or her study leave is approved by the Minister shall be deemed to have deserted the public service and is therefore liable for disciplinary action. (8) An officer on study leave is not entitled to a full salary while on vacation and shall not resume the duties of his or her substantive post until he or she has completed training, but where the exigencies of work so require he or she may be paid such an allowance for services rendered as the Minister, in consultation with the Minister responsible for Finance, may determine.” [12] Sub-regulation (8) underscores the fact that proceeding to study fulltime absent a study leave is a disciplinary offence. It is, therefore, absolutely necessary that public servants who are desirous of studying fulltime should when applying for loan bursaries, provide NMDS with study leaves. [13] NMDS is an integral part of the Crown. It is the Crown that provides loan bursaries to public servants who are released to study fulltime. Logically, NMDS should not be hoodwinked, in any shape or form, to sponsor public servants who are deserters - for that is what becomes of a public officer who proceeds to study fulltime without study leave. [14] Counsel argued with gusto that the appellant’s withdrawal from study and assumption of duty could not be the concern a business of NMDS. I understand the effect of the 9 submission to be that the appellant was not obliged to make NMDS aware of the withdrawal of study leave. [15] Included in the appellant’s and NMDS’s undertakings by the Loan Bursary Agreement are the following: “2 a. To attend, during the course of his training, all lecturers, tutorials, field work, practical work and all other training required for his/her course and to successfully complete each study year; … 5\. The parties agree that that the Government may at any time suspend or revoke this agreement for good cause if the Government is satisfied that the Borrower has breached the conditions set out in paragraph 2 … 6\. Where the government is satisfied that the borrower is in breach of paragraph 2(a) without good cause acceptable to the Government, he/she shall not be given the food allowance for the period in which he/she did not attend lecturers.” [16] It cannot be disputed with any measure of success that reference to Government in the Agreement includes NMDS. As soon as Director NMDS was informed by his counterpart in Home Affairs on 28 September that the appellant had withdrawn from study, Director NMDS was within his rights to trigger clause 5. [17] In my judgment, the appellant’s withdrawal from study and return to work constitute a good cause to revoke the Agreement. The appellant had voluntarily and unconditionally withdrawn from study and returned to work. He rightly informed his employer to make them aware of this. The employer informed NMDS. It would be irresponsible and 10 a waste of public funds for NMDS to continue to pay for tuition, food and accommodation for the appellant when the raison detre for continuing the Agreement was no more. [18] The appellant’s letter of withdrawal of study leave and its notice to NMDS by the employer constitutes a valid ground to terminate the Agreement. If the appellant did not want NMDS to know that he was no more studying, he was wrong and would be engaging in dishonest behavior breaching. Disposition [19] None of the grounds of appeal have been made good. The Loan Bursary Agreement between the Government and its employee has ceased to exist. NMDS is not bound to sponsor the appellant who no more wants to continue with fulltime study. Order [20] In the result, the following order is made: 1\. The appeal is dismissed with costs. ______________________________ S. P. SAKOANE CHIEF JUSTICE 11 I agree ______________________________ K. E. MOSITO PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL I agree _______________________________ J. VAN DER WESTHUIZEN ACTING JUSTICE OF APPEAL FOR THE APPELLANT: M. B. KHAMPEPE FOR THE RESPONDENTS: R. KANETSI #### __Related documents ▲ To the top >