High Court Orders School to Readmit Student Expelled Over Vape

A student who was expelled from school over allegations of being found with an electronic cigarette has been given a reprieve after the High Court ordered his conditional return to school pending the hearing of his case.

This gives the student, whose name is identified as AOA, an opportunity to return to school while seeking to have the legality of his expulsion heard.

In a ruling made on Thursday, Justice Lawrence Mugambi made the order that the student be returned to school pending the hearing of a constitutional case filed to challenge the actions taken against him.

This allows the student to return to school while the case is heard by the court.

The student was first suspended indefinitely from school on January 20, 2026.

However, this was later escalated to expulsion on February 9, 2026, due to allegations that vapes were found in the student’s possession.

The school claimed that the student did not take part in any co-curricular activities.

Dispute Over Disciplinary Process

Although the incident was not disputed, the legal claim by the student was based on the process adopted by the school in arriving at their decision.

This is because, according to the court, the key issue was whether the school had followed the due process as spelt out by the law and school regulations.

“This factual account is not disputed; nevertheless, the petitioner challenges whether the disciplinary procedure followed the Basic Education Act, its regulations, and the school’s own student behaviour policy,” the High Court stated.

The school, in its defense, argued that the student had other legal options at their disposal, which included appealing to the Education Appeals Tribunal or filing a judicial review application.

Court Affirms Right to Constitutional Petition

Justice Mugambi was quoted as saying the constitution grants the right to the public to seek redress in court in the event of the infringement of constitutional rights.

The judge cited Article 23 of the Constitution, which grants the public the right to the enforcement of constitutional rights such as the right to education.

The court noted that the process in dealing with the case was wanting in the aspect that the County Director of Education was not involved in the process as required by the regulations.

The Education Appeals Tribunal was not applicable in the process.

“Absence of the county director reports before the drastic action of expression was undertaken demonstrates that the petitioner established an arguable case concerning the propriety of process which implicates his right of access to education,” Justice Mugambi ruled.

Also Read: NTSA Pulls the Plug on Instant Fines, Says Court Case Now ‘Pointless’

Balancing Discipline and Student Rights

The need to strike a balance between the need to enforce discipline in the school and the need to protect the rights of the student was also highlighted in the ruling.

Mugambi recognized the need to enforce discipline in the school as well as the need to provide the student with the right to education.

“The court is very much aware of the need to maintain the equilibrium between the minor’s right of access to education, with the respondent’s duty to enforce discipline in the school so as to provide a conducive learning environment for the rest of the pupils and the school community at large,” the judge stated.

However, the court was also keen to point out that the student should be given the chance to reform his behavior before he is expelled from the school.

Also Read: Court Strips Esther Musila of Control Over Late Husband’s Estate in Landmark Ruling

Interim Relief Pending Final Determination

The student had not been in school for more than 50 days.

The court found this significant in determining the potential damage or harm that the student might suffer in his education.

The student’s non-attendance in school was found to be in violation of the provisions of Article 53 of the Constitution, which states that the child has the right to basic education.

The court therefore ordered interim relief in the case.

AOA is therefore allowed to go back to school under certain conditions pending the full hearing and determination of the petition.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for instant news updates