The Federal College of Agriculture, Akure (FECA), Ondo State, has dismissed the claim by the Ogunmokun Family that the Supreme Court has issued a quit notice to the Federal Government, the college, and several businesses occupying a disputed parcel of land within the college.

While urging the public to disregard the family’s position, the Provost of the college, Dr. Albert Fadiyimu, stated that, contrary to the misinformation being spread by the opposing party, the land dispute is far from being resolved.

The Ogunmokun family of Akure had, a few weeks ago, claimed ownership of the disputed land after a purported verdict from the apex court, which allegedly ordered filling stations, several shops, and Benin Motor Park along the Akure/Owo/Ilesha Road on the disputed parcel of land to vacate.

According to Fadiyimu, who clarified the situation during a briefing with journalists, no final judgement has been delivered.

The Provost disclosed that the earlier appeal was struck out on procedural grounds and not because the Supreme Court examined the substance of the matter or resolved the issues raised in the appeal, adding that the striking out simply means that, due to a procedural defect, the appeal could not proceed at that time.

While urging members of the public not to transact over the disputed land pending the final resolution of the matter by the apex court, Fadiyimu maintained that any claim of ownership or possession by the opposing party is false and unlawful.

He said, “Although the earlier appeal filed at the Supreme Court was struck out on procedural grounds, our legal team has since filed a formal application for leave to appeal, accompanied by the Proposed Notice of Appeal.

“The application is valid, competent, and has been duly entered and is awaiting hearing. We are confident that justice will ultimately be served through the due process of the law.

“The Supreme Court is now seized of the matter, and no party has the lawful authority or moral justification to take unilateral actions or make provocative statements capable of misleading the public and destabilising peace.

“We are also compelled to correct a fundamental misconception, which the opposing party is deliberately exploiting, about the misunderstanding of the legal implications of a matter being struck out by the Supreme Court.

“A final judgment of the Supreme Court is one that conclusively determines the rights of the parties after hearing arguments from both sides, leading to a considered decision on the merits of the case. In such a situation, the matter is completely decided, and there is nothing more left for the court to entertain on the issues in dispute. It is not a decision on the merit or a declaration of victory for either party.”