28. On behalf of the 2nd Respondent it filed a replying affidavit sworn by its Secretary of Administration, Brown I Otuya, on 17th November, 2014. 29. According to him, the Ministry pursuant to the provisions of section 66 (2) of the Kenya Information and Communications Act, 1998 wrote to the organizations named thereunder to nominate a member to constitute the selection panel to conduct interviews for the chairperson and members of the board of the Authority and these organisations forwarded the names of their nominees to the Ministry after which the selection panel nominated Ms Carole Kariuki a nominee of the Kenya Private Sector Alliance as the Chairperson and Mr. Stephen Mutoro a nominee of the Consumers Federation of Kenya as Vice Chairperson. 30. It was deposed that the Ministry declared vacancies for the position of members of the board of the Communications Authority of Kenya in the Kenya Gazette as Gazette Notice No. 1781 of the 17th March 2014 under section 66 (1) (a) of the Kenya Information and Communications Act, 1998 and invited suitably qualified candidates to apply which advertisement was placed in the Ministry's website instructing suitably qualified candidates on the requirements for the position and how to apply. Pursuant thereto the, applications which were received within the stipulated time and were presented to the selection panel and candidates who had complied with the advertisements and had been shortlisted were advertised on the Ministry website as well as the Kenya Gazette. However, in light of the few applications received and a consideration of the principles enshrined in section 232 of the Constitution, the selection panel directed that a press statement be placed in the newspapers and Ministry website directing applicants to apply for the board member positions which was done. 31. It was therefore the deponent’s view that the Ministry duly followed the law in the appointment of the selection panel and that the Ministry website from which all applicants obtained information about the vacancies was exhaustive regarding the requirements for suitable candidates and application procedures. Further, the Ministry website clearly defined the deadline for receiving applications as 5.00pm on the 15th April 2014 which time requirement the applicant did not meet as his application was received past 8.00 pm on the 15th April 2014 and as such was not amongst the considered applicants for the post. He averred that the ex parte applicant received an email delivery failure report for his application at 8.59 am. 32. To the deponent, the ex parte Applicant was the architect of his own misfortune as he would have been in a position to check his mail to confirm that his correspondence had been sent and if not resend the application in time instead of doing so after 8.00pm on 15th April 2014, a period of approximately 12 hours. In any event, the website wherefrom all the applicants for the position received information carried a telephone number namely (+254) 4920000/1. It was asserted that the e-mail designated for receiving the applications for the position was in good working order as numerous applications were received from other applicants through the same and in good time hence the claims by the ex parte applicant that article 47 of the Constitution or any part thereof was violated by the Ministry is misguided. He added that the names of applicants who had duly applied for the position as well as shortlisted candidates were published in the Kenya Gazette and Ministry website. 33. His position therefore was that the Ministry did not violate the provisions of section 6B of the Act as alleged by the ex parte applicant at paragraph 17 of the verifying affidavit and