An employment dispute between State-owned Kenya Power and one of its senior technicians has peeled back the lid on how irregular electricity projects, internal collusion and weak oversight exposed the utility to losses of Sh46 million.

The case, centred on a dismissed senior technician, revealed a pattern of unauthorised connections, diversion of materials and a breakdown of internal controls across the utility’s network.

At the heart of the dispute were two questionable projects on the Kisumu–Bondo feeder line, including the installation of a 100 kilovolt-ampere (KVA) transformer and construction of an “H-structure” to reroute power to private customers without proper approval.

The court heard that the 2023 projects were not part of approved company schemes, yet company materials were used and installations completed outside formal processes.

Evidence showed that materials were withdrawn in large quantities under legitimate maintenance references, then diverted to illegal works.

“The misappropriation of materials involved irregular proposals for maintenance and references for reinforcement schemes, design approval, and funding vide internal orders done. Materials would be withdrawn in huge quantities and used in unauthorised and illegal schemes,” the court noted, pointing to manipulation of internal systems to facilitate the projects.

One project in Holo, Kisumu County, was particularly telling. It was not funded by the company but used the utility’s materials, leading to an estimated loss of Sh46 million.

Investigators found that poles meant for official use were collected from a sub-station and used to construct unauthorised infrastructure.

Read: Infrastructure vandals face Sh10m fine, jail term in proposed law

Collusion web

Testimony linked multiple actors, including a supervisor, technicians and a private electrician who allegedly sourced materials and executed work on the ground.

The masterminds of the misappropriation were named as an area distribution engineer, two supervisors, an operations and maintenance supervisor, an artisan and a non-designated driver.

The court observed that some key figures, including a senior supervisor, exited the company during investigations, complicating accountability.

“The masterminds… were named,” the ruling stated, but some were never subjected to full disciplinary processes after leaving employment.

The dismissed technician, Wansawa Soita, who was the feeder owner, denied involvement but admitted that “nothing could happen without his authority or knowledge” on the line he oversaw.

The court found this position inconsistent with his claim of ignorance regarding the illegal projects.

Soita was dismissed in August 2023 over allegations of facilitating illegal electricity connections, irregular installation of a transformer and receiving money from a private electrician linked to unauthorised works.

He moved to court in late August 2025, challenging the termination as unlawful and unfair. He sought 12 months’ salary compensation, unpaid leave, Sh20 million in damages for discrimination, or reinstatement with full benefits.

Money trail

However, scrutiny focused on communication records and financial transactions linking him to the private electrician involved in the works.

Call logs showed contact between the two, as well as with a security guard at the sub-station from which materials were collected.

Mobile money M-Pesa records also revealed multiple payments from the private electrician to the technician, which he attributed to a side business selling farm produce.

The court, however, found the explanations unconvincing, noting contradictions in the technician’s testimony. The transactions were scrutinised after investigators linked the same electrician to the collection of company materials and execution of unauthorised power projects, casting doubt on the true purpose of the payments.

“Evidence revealed that the claimant, and two other people (names withheld) collaborated in the storage and movement of the respondent’s poles to and from the Kisian sub-station and were used to contract the H. structure,” the judge said.

The ruling further stated that the technician received “unexplained deposits” and failed to report irregular activities despite his oversight role.

“It is equally clear that the claimant received unexplained deposits from….The claimant’s assertion that he could not contradict his immediate supervisor while feigning ignorance of what he was doing and made no verifiable effort to report to the respondent could not avail the claimant,” said the court.

Process flaw

Investigators also established that the sub-station used to dispatch materials was not designated as a storage facility, raising questions about internal controls over inventory movement.

A security guard confirmed that materials were released after receiving instructions, linking operational lapses to both field staff and supervisory structures.

Despite these findings, the court distinguished between substantive justification and procedural fairness.

It held that the company had a valid reason to dismiss the employee based on the evidence available at the time.

However, the dismissal process was flawed after the technician was given only 48 hours to respond to a show-cause notice tied to a complex audit report.

“That was too short, particularly bearing in mind that he had to go through the Audit Report and respond effectively, which impeded his right to be heard,” said the court.

“It is trite that an employee ought to be accorded reasonable time to respond to the notice to show cause and prepare for the disciplinary hearing.”

The court concluded that while the termination was justified, it was procedurally unfair.

The employee was awarded one month’s salary and payment for 12 leave days, with all other claims dismissed.

→ jwangui@ke.nationmedia.com

Follow our WhatsApp channel for the latest business and markets updates.