BY ANDREW IKEHI
When about a year ago, precisely Wednesday, September 25th, 2024, one Mr, Silverline Oritserenojo, approached the Delta State House of Assembly through a petition submitted on the floor of the House on his behalf by the Member representing Warri South 1 State Constituency, Hon Augustine Uroye (JP), one thing was uppermost on his mind; to get justice.
The justice he sought was that he should be reinstated into the services of his former employer; the College of Education Warri and also, that his withheld emoluments should be paid.
He had, through the petition, faulted his retirement from the services of the College which he termed unlawful and premature.
Upon receipt of the petition as presented on his behalf by the member representing Warri South 1 State Constituency, Hon Augustine Uroye, the House, in line with order V111, Rule 42(6) of the extant Standing Order (SO) of the house and, in compliance with the principles of equity, fairness and justice, referred the petition to the Assembly Committee on public petition for investigation.
Barely one year after, the committee headed by the member representing Ughelli North 1 State Constituency, Hon. Matthew Onojighofia Omonade, submitted its report.
In the report presented on Tuesday, September 9 at the resumed plenary after the Six weeks legislative annual recess, the lawmakers, banking on what it described as lack of merit, quashed the petition.
The House resolution, it was gathered, was sequel to recommendation from the Assembly House committee on Public petition as presented by its Chairman, Hon. Matthew Omonade, just ast it also, affirmed the retirement of the petitioner as handed down on him by his employer; College of Education, Warri.
Following the report, the House also, barred the petitioner from presenting same petition before the State House of Assembly.
Motion for the adoption of the committee report which was moved by the leader of the House, Hon Emeka Nwaobi, was seconded by the member representing Warri South 1 State Constituency, Hon. Augustine Uroye as it was unanimously adopted by the House following a voice vote called by the Speaker, Rt. (Hon.) Emomotimi Guwor.
Commending the committee for what he described as “thorough and Chrystal clear report, the speaker, Rt. (Hon.) Emomotimi Guwor enjoined the Clerk of the House, Mr. Otto Aghoghophia to communicate the House resolution to the appropriate quarters, particularly the petitioner and the Management of College of Education, Warri.
For the record, the petitioner, Mr. Silverline Oritserenojo had approached the State House of Assembly to intervene and prevail on the management of College of Education Warri to withdraw his alleged premature retirement from the College, praying the House for his reinstatement and payment of his withheld emoluments.
His alleged premature retirement, it was gathered, bothered largely on an alleged falsification of age which was preferred against him by the College.
According to the Hon. Matthew Omonade-led Public Petition’s Committee report, the Management of College of Education Warri, represented by its Provost, Dr. Dickson Oyovwi contended that the retirement of the petitioner, Mr. Silverline Oritserenojo from the services of the college was lawful and in order, having attained the mandatory official retirement age of 60 years.
The college provost argued that the petitioner’s retirement ought to have been done since 2019, adding that the petitioner extended his year of retirement with an alleged falsely sworn affidavit on the claim that he was born on 20th May, 1964 instead of 20th May, 1959.
The provost, according to the committee report, stated that pursuant to the staff audit/verification exercise, the college Registrar went to Hussey College, Warri to verify the Petitioner’s status where it was discovered that the petitioner transferred from Mid-western College Effurun to Hussey College, Warri where he was admitted into the school in class two on January 5, 1973 and on the admission list where it was revealed that his date of birth is May 20, 1959.
According to the report, the College Provost stated that whereas the Petitioner claimed he finished primary Six in 1974 as reflected in the primary Six certificate, he was said to have transferred to Hussey College, Warri from Mid-Western College, Effurun into class two on January 5, 1973 as reflected in the Hussey College, Warri admission list.
He noted that there were discrepancies in the primary school testimonial and the school leaving certificate submitted by the petitioner during the verification/audit exercise after denying the committee access to those documents when they were first requested for in 2022, when he first appeared before the committee as he claimed that the documents had been burnt by fire incident in the school.
Speaking further, the College Provost added that while the primary school testimonial was bearing Delta State and carried the name Oritserenojo Silverline M.T, the Primary school leaving certificate had the name, Oritserenojo Markson, and issued by the Mid-Western State of Nigeria.
He argued that the names could not have been the same person even though both documents had 1974 as the year of examination and graduation, stressing that the petitioner could not have written primary six examinations in 1974 when he was already in class 3.
Insisting that the petitioner was duly retired from the service of College of Education, Warri, haven attained the mandatory official age of 60 years and, which years of service ought to have elapsed since 2019, haven been born, according to available records on May 20 1959, the College Provost averred that the petitioner’s claims are flavoured with a lot of terminological in exactitude and inconsistencies. He urged the Assembly Committee on public petition to discountenance the Petitioner’s prayer as according to him, it lacks merit.
The Petitioner’s Defence:
Meanwhile, according to the public Petition’s Committee report, the Petitioner, Mr Silverline Oritserenojo who was represented by a lawyer Akpor Efe-Urhobo Esq during the investigative hearing, gave evidence to substantiate his complaint of unlawful premature retirement from the service of College of Education, Warri.
In his evidence,he averred that he was prematurely retired from service on the assumption that he was over the age of retirement (60 years) as at May 20, 2022 but graciously extended by his employer (College of Education, Warri) to December 31, 2022, when he was eventually retired, adding that there was yet, no proof whatsoever to justify the decision to retire him from service.
He insisted that his retirement from the service of College of Education, Warri was not only premature, but unlawful as his real retirement date would have been May 20th, 2024 and not May 20, 2022 as erroneously alluded to by the College of Education, Warri.
According to him, the date of birth, May 20, 1962 relied upon by the College authority to retire him from service is, to say the least, ridiculous as there is no evidence to substantiate the actions of the Institution, stressing that his date of birth is and has always been May 20, 1964 as his record of service with the college would show
He posted that as at the time he was seeking employment with the College of Education, Warri in 1999, he submitted an affidavit of age declaration duly deposed to by his Cousin, Mr. Enonuya Esimaje on the 29th day of July 1992, affirming that he (the petitioner) was born on the 20th day of May, 1964 in Warri South local Government Area of Delta State
He insisted that throughout his career with the college, he had maintained the same date of birth and never changed it. He said he was, therefore surprised when , in July 2022, the college served him with a memo captioned; Notice of Retirement, advising him that his retirement date took effect from May 20, 2022, creating the impression that he had attained the age of 60 years as at May,20, 2022.
With the committee report and recommendation which was unanimously adopted by the House, the State legislature has foreclosed any chance of the petitioner seeking further redress from the State Assembly as the legislators’ recommendation and resolution bars the petitioner from approaching the House with same petition in the future.
