The petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition, seeking for cancellation of B.L.Degree obtained by the 3rd respondent.

2. According to the petitioner, he is working as Senior Assistant Secretary (Establishment), General Administration Department of Chennai Port Trust. The 3rd respondent, while in service, had completed B.L.Degree in the year 1981. He joined services of the Chennai Port Trust as a regular employee on 11.10.1979 on probation. While discharging services as regular employee, it could not have been possible for him to attend the regular course at Pondicherry Law College which is situated almost 150 kms from place of work of the 3rd respondent. During the period of probation, the employee is not entitled to extended periods of leave and even if he avails such extension of period of leave, then consequently, period of probation would get extended for a further period. His probation was declared in the said post of Lower Division Clerk on 22.11.1981, by which, it is clear that he had never taken any extended periods of leave for the purpose of pursuing the course. Even for pursuing the said course, the third respondent had not obtained any prior permission from the concerned authorities as per the Rules and Regulations of the Chennai Port Trust. By virtue of said BL Degree, the third respondent got promoted to the post of Legal Assistant and thereafter, reached to the present level of Senior Class-I of Senior Asst.Secretary (Estt.). According to the petitioner, while the third respondent himself obtained fraudulent BL Degree and got promotions, he has no locus standi or right to continue in the present post. The petitioner made a representation to the 2nd respondent and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu on 9.10.2009 to look into the genuineness of the BL Degree obtained by the third respondent. He also made application to the first respondent under RTI Act for information as regards completion of B.L.Course by the third respondent. By letter, dated 24.2.2010, the first respondent informed that the Puducherry Law College, the third respondent was permitted to write examination. The petitioner made a representation dated 4.3.2010 to the second respondent, seeking information with regard to the years of course completion and attendance details of the third respondent between October, 1979 to August, 1981. By proceedings, dated 12.4.2010, the second respondent informed the petitioner that the third respondent was admitted on 4.7.1977 and issued TC on 22.1.1980. The petitioner again sought for information from the second respondent on 26.4.2010 the reasons for delay in completion of the course by the third respondent. By proceedings dated 24.5.2010, second respondent informed the petitioner that they have no records and they could not be traced out. Finally, the petitioner sent a letter dated 21.6.2010 to the first respondent seeking for cancellation of the B.L.Degree conferred on the third respondent. By proceedings, dated 5.7.2010, the first respondent while considering the representation of the petitoner dated 9.10.2009, intimating that the University permits the candidate to appear for the examination based upon the examination application of the candidate duly forwarded by the Principal of the appropriate college and any candidate appearing for the examination should have the prescribed eligible attendance and the responsibility to ascertain candidate to appear for the examination vested only with the Principal and thereby, the Principal of the Government Pondicherry Law College is responsible to deal with the issue. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by third respondent, stating that since the third respondent along with other employees complained to the higher authorities about posting of the petitioner as Deputy Secretary contrary to the Recruitment Rules, the petit