Manjula Chellur, C.J.

1. This writ petition is filed as a public interest litigation seeking relief of writ of quo warranto declaring that appointment of fourth respondent to the post of Director, National Waterways Road, Maradu, Kochi as illegal and erroneous for contravening provisions of Regulations.

2. In brief petitioner's case is, he was working as Senior Accounts Officer with second respondent Inland Waterways Authority of India at Head Office, NOIDA, New Delhi in 2011. Fourth respondent was appointed as the Director of third respondent at Kochi in flagrant violation of Exhibit P1 Regulations of Recruitment based upon which recruitments have to be made; the eligibility criteria indicated at Exhibit P1 for direct recruitment clearly prescribes the maximum age limit for the post of Director as 45 years; fourth respondent, being 56 years at the time of appointment (Date of Birth being 17.06.1954), was not eligible to be appointed as Director.

3. As a matter of fact, the selection committee for recruiting the Director ought to consist of three members, but the selection committee selecting the fourth respondent as the Director consisted of only two members, i.e. Vice Chairman and Chief Engineer. At the time of appointment, there was no proper vigilance clearance for fourth respondent which is mandatory. The post held by the fourth respondent is a public post and his appointment being not in conformity with the existing Rules and Regulations, interest of public at large is jeo pardised. It is nothing but a mala fide exercise of power indicating manifestation of abuse of power vested in respondents 1 and 2. With these averments, petitioner sought for the following reliefs:

“I. To issue a writ of quo warranto and declare that the post of Director, National Waterways Road, Maradu, Kochi682304 that is claimed to be occupied by the 4th respondent is vacant.

II. To issue a writ of mandamus and command the 1st and 2nd respondents to ouster the 4th respondent from the office of Director, National Waterways Road, Maradu, Kochi-682304 and restrain him from exercising any function or duties relating to such office.

III. To call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibits P2 and P3 order appointing 4th respondent to the post of Director of the 3rd respondent and examine its legality and propriety and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari.

IV. To issue a writ of mandamus and command respondents 1 to 3 to refrain from further extending any pay or allowances of the post of Director, National Waterways Road, Maradu, Kochi-682304 to the 4th respondent.

V. To pass any other and such other orders as this Honourable court deem fit to pass in the nature and circumstances of the case.”

4. Inter alia, contesting respondents 2 and 3 from Inland Waterways Authority of India have filed common objections contending as under:

The writ petition is not maintainable as petitioner has no locus standi, being a Government servant working as Senior Accounts Officer, to file the present petition in the form of public interest litigation. In the absence of any legal right of the petitioner being jeo pardised, the very purpose of filing this public interest litigation indicates hidden agenda for the petitioner to approach the court. However, the post of Director not being a public post, which is dealing with day-to-day public activities, cannot be questioned by filing a public interest litigation. As a matter of fact, petitioner is facing charges of corruption under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act and proceedings were initiated before the CBI Court in C.C.No.5/2006. So far as fourth respondent, he was initially appointed as Assistant Director by direct recruitment in the year 1987, later promoted as Deputy Director in March 1993. Post of Director under direct recruitment quota became vacant since March 2006. Advertisement calling for applications was issued in the month of December 2009. Fourth respondent also app