Bursary approvals stall as Controller of Budget seeks court clarity

Thousands of students seeking bursaries will remain in limbo as Controller of Budget Margaret Nyakang’o seeks urgent court clarification on orders that have halted county disbursements, throwing the future of many learners into uncertainty.

In an urgent application filed at the Nakuru High Court, Nyakang’o is seeking interpretation of court orders issued on February 3, 2025, which she says have caused confusion in the implementation of Circular No. 1 of 2025.

The circular, issued by her office, outlines the legal framework counties must follow to disburse bursaries and requires, among other things, that such disbursements be supported by formal inter-governmental agreements.

The orders in question stem from a constitutional petition filed by Laban Omusundi and the Katiba Institute, challenging county-level public finance management concerning education support programmes. The respondents in the case include the county governments of Nakuru and Murang’a, the National Treasury, the Senate, and the National Assembly.

According to Nyakang’o, while a court ruling delivered orally on April 8, 2025, clarified some aspects of the conservatory orders, specifically Orders 7 and 9, it failed to address the implications of Orders 5, 6 and 8, creating legal ambiguity.

Through a certificate of urgency signed by legal officer Abigael Rasugu, she argues that the lack of clarity on these orders has paralysed bursary processing, with no approvals made since the orders were issued.

Orders 5 and 6 restrain the Controller of Budget from withdrawing, retracting, or interfering with Circular No. 1 of 2025. These orders effectively uphold the circular’s continued validity and implementation, reinforcing its authority as the guiding framework for county bursary disbursements.

Restriction

However, Order 7 restricts the Controller’s role, directing her office not to approve any county bursary expenditure that is not accompanied by the necessary inter-governmental transfer agreements. This condition appears to limit the operational scope of the circular unless counties meet specific criteria.

Further, Order 8 restrains the Controller from implementing any agreement made with the Council of Governors during the 26th Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council (IBEC) meeting, to the extent that such agreements contradict the provisions of the circular or the reliefs sought in the petition.

At the same time, Order 9 bars the Nakuru and Murang’a county governments from issuing new bursaries or bursaries to new beneficiaries that extend beyond the current financial year. This effectively limits the scope and timing of county educational support.

In her sworn affidavit, Nyakang’o states that while Orders 5 and 6 uphold the legal standing of the circular, Orders 7 and 9 restrain her office from approving bursary requests unless specific conditions are met, creating operational uncertainty.

“The selective clarification has created legal and operational uncertainty, potentially putting my office in a situation where any action or inaction could be viewed as contempt,” she said.

She further maintained that her application was filed in good faith, aimed at ensuring her office remains compliant with the law while upholding principles of prudent financial management.

“This application is made in good faith to ensure compliance and safeguard prudent financial management,” Nyakang’o said.

Other Topics To Read

• Education
• Controller of Budget
• Controller of Budget Margaret Nyakang'o
• Controller of Budget counties
• bursaries Controller of Budget
• Office of the Controller of Budget
• Bursary approvals stall as Controller of Budget seeks court clarity
• Headlines

Adding to the complexity, the County Government of Murang’a has filed separate contempt of court proceedings against the Controller, accusing her of failing to comply with the contested orders.