A former Gauteng school principal has lost his bid to overturn his dismissal after an Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) arbitrator found that he had misused public school funds and breached financial management rules while serving as acting principal.
P. Bango, who was employed by the Gauteng Department of Education in 2013 and served as principal of Northview High School before being demoted to deputy principal, was dismissed following findings of financial misconduct. His appeal for retrospective reinstatement with full benefits was dismissed after Senior ELRC arbitrator Coen Havenga ruled that both the dismissal and disciplinary process were fair.
The department charged Bango with four counts of misconduct, including using school funds to purchase goods worth R23,497 at Makro for personal use, paying R1,396 towards a television licence using school money, failing to account for school expenditure amounting to R16,770.57, and authorising cash withdrawals and cash-send transactions totalling R25,280 while in possession of the school’s bank card.
During arbitration proceedings, the school’s administrative officer, Pamela Ditodi, testified that she accompanied Bango to Makro after two laptops previously bought by the school had been returned, leaving a credit on the school’s account.
According to Ditodi, Bango selected a television, laptop and projector before using school funds to complete the transaction. She told the arbitrator that when the cashier requested a valid television licence, Bango asked to use hers. After discovering that her licence fees were in arrears, he allegedly settled the R1,396 outstanding amount using school funds.
Ditodi testified that she “never requested that her television licence be paid and derived no benefit from the payment.” She further alleged that the television was transported to what she believed was Bango’s home rather than the school and that none of the purchased items were recorded in the school’s asset register. She also said equipment later presented during an inspection did not match the serial numbers and barcodes of the items bought at Makro.
Department investigator Mario Mandlazi told the arbitration that Bango had been given an opportunity to explain the allegations but “failed to provide a substantive response”. He added that investigators found no evidence that the items had been properly recorded and that the school’s financial records reflected cash withdrawals and electronic cash transfers that violated departmental financial policies.
Bango denied all allegations, insisting that the television, laptop and projector were intended for school use and had been delivered directly to the school. He argued that the Makro transaction was merely an exchange for previously returned laptops and claimed there was no functioning asset register at the time. He also alleged that the accusations were fabricated following disagreements over procurement decisions.
Although some of Bango’s witnesses testified that they had seen the equipment being used at the school, several admitted that the purchases had never been reported to the school governing body as required.
In his ruling, Havenga rejected Bango’s version of events, describing him as “an evasive witness” and finding that his allegations of a conspiracy were unsupported by credible evidence. The arbitrator further found that the claim the Makro purchase was simply an exchange was a “feeble attempt” to justify his failure to comply with established financial procedures.
Havenga concluded that the Gauteng Department of Education had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that Bango had committed all four acts of misconduct.
“The evidence showed Bango had disregarded financial management rules governing public funds and that his actions constituted serious misconduct,” the arbitrator found.
Explaining why dismissal was the appropriate sanction, Havenga said Bango occupied a position of trust and was responsible for protecting public funds meant for learners’ education.
He found that the misuse and mismanagement of school finances undermined the department’s constitutional obligations and said dismissal served as an appropriate deterrent given the prevalence of similar financial misconduct cases. The arbitrator also noted that Bango had shown little remorse and continued to justify his conduct throughout the proceedings, concluding that the trust relationship between him and the department had broken down irretrievably.
