Rotimi Fadeyi
Senior Correspondent, Abuja

The money was said to be an accumulated overpayment on its monthly allocation from the federation account on the 13 per cent derivation for the period of June 1999 to February 2003.

Justice Stephen Jonah Adah of the Federal High Court, Abuja held in his rulling that the state failed to provide sufficient evidence that it was not overpaid.

However, Delta may file an appeal before the Court of Appeal to challenge the judgement.

Adah said his judgement was based on a document presented in court by the office of the Accountant General of the Federation showing details of how some states, including Delta, were overpaid.

It also showed how other states were underpaid during the period in question. Apart from Delta, other states that were overpaid included Abia, Ondo, and Rivers.

Those underpaid are Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Edo, and Imo.

Before Adah dismissed the case of Delta, he explained that the document was not a new formula for revenue sharing but aimed at correcting errors made by RMAFC in the overpayments and underpayments made to some states.

In the suit, Delta State argued that there was no proof that the state was overpaid its monthly revenue allocation during the period as being alleged by RMAFC.

Specifically, Delta State asked for an interlocutory order restraining the defendants from deducting any sum or further deducting any sum from its monthly allocation.

The suit filed by Dr. Alex Izinyon (SAN) on behalf of Delta State Government was supported by 13-paragraph statement of claim where the state averred that sometimes in June 2004, during the Federal Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) meeting, a document entitled: “Exposure of underpayments and overpayments arising from the sharing of 13 per cent derivation fund from June 1999 to February 2003,” was circulated by the Revenue Commission to the oil producing states that at the meeting.