FAIZAL KOLLALI Vs. VADAKKENGARA ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner claims that he is a "public spirited person" who is engaged in social and charitable activities for the unliftment of the downtrodden and rural community. He has filed this Writ Petition praying for instituting an enquiry against respondent No. 1 who has recently retired from service as a Lower Primary School Teacher. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 1 had corrected his date of birth and continued in service for two years in excess of what he could have been actually entitled to. It is contended by the petitioner that respondent No. 1 had changed his date of birth from July 1, 1947 to July 1, 1949. This was done by him while he had joined Pulickal Arabic College. In fact, going by his actual date of birth, he ought to have retired from service in the year 2002; but he managed to continue till 2004. Thus he drew salary and other benefits on the basis of this alteration made in his date of birth. Therefore the petitioner prays that respondents 3 and 4 may be directed to recover the excess amount paid to respondent No. 1 by way of salary and other benefits and there may be a further direction not to release his pensionary and other retirement benefits till an enquiry is instituted and completed.

(2.) It is admitted by the petitioner himself that he came to know about the alteration made by respondent No. 1 from a newspaper report. Petitioner pleads that he has no axe to grind against respondent No. 1. There is no personal animosity or political rivalry, but the petitioner wants to show his commitment to the society and expose such social evils and fight against them. He does not want the offender to go unpunished. He does not want the State exchequer to lose public funds. Petitioner apprehends that respondent No. 1 may use his political clout and manage to get away without any punishment.

(3.) Respondent No. 1 has appeared through a counsel and filed a counter affidavit. He has vehemently denied the entire allegations made against him. He avers that the entries in his service book were made by the Head of the Institution at the time when he had joined the service. The entries were verified and countersigned by the Assistant Educational Officer, Kondotty. He has produced the extract of the School admission register in support of his contention. Be that as it may, the short question that arises for cosideration is whether this Writ Petition at the instance of the petitioner is to be entertained.