1. Public Interest Writ Petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondents 1 to 6, pertaining to the appointment of respondents 7 and 8 and consequently prayed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry in respect of the certificate of Experience produced by respondents 7 and 8 and take further action.

2. Case of the petitioner is that Dr. N. Rajendran, Son of Narayanasamy, 7th respondent herein, residing at Door No. 1-4, New Kothangudi Flats, Aranganathan Salai, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram 608 002, who is now posted as Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, Government Arts and College, Chidambaram, has obtained employment, misleading the authorities, regarding his qualification. Under RTI, the petitioner came to know that Dr. N. Rajendran (7th respondent) never served as a Teacher at Centre of Advanced Study in Marine Biology, Annamalai University, but served only as a Research Officer and that his appointment was not under the employment of University.

3. The petitioner has further submitted that the 7th respondent applied for the post of Lecturer in Zoology, by direct recruitment of Lecturers in Government Arts and Science Colleges and a provisional certificate of selection was issued to him based on the certificates submitted by him, regarding his education and qualifications prescribed for the post. Subsequently, the provisional certificate for the appointment was cancelled, as his teaching experience required, for the post was not fulfilled.

4. Aggrieved by the cancellation, the 7th respondent has filed W.P. No. 17863 of 2008 challenging the cancellation of the provisional certificate of appointment. According to the petitioner, even though the Government had filed a counter, stating that the 14 marks awarded to the petitioner towards teaching experience cannot at all be granted, since the petitioner had served only as a Research Officer and that the same cannot be treated as teaching experience, this Court relied on the certificate of experience purported to have been issued by Annamalai University, which was produced by the 7th respondent. In that certificate, it has been stated that the petitioner was having 7 years of experience in teaching the students and research scholars. Based on this certificate, this Court set aside the order of the cancellation of the provisional selection and directed the Teachers Recruitment Board (2nd Respondent) to issue the posting order to the 7th respondent.

5. Subsequently, the 7th respondent has filed a Contempt Petition No. 1198 of 2009, against the respondents 1 and 2 for not complying with the directions issued in W.P. No. 17863 of 2008 and for issuance of posting order. According to the petitioner, certificate of experience produced by the 7th respondent, before this Court was not genuine and bogus. After obtaining the information under the RTI Act from Annamalai University, he had sent representations to the Director of the Directorate of Collegiate Education, Chennai (3rd respondent), Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Trichy and to the Principal, Government College of Arts and Science, Chidambaram (5th respondent), but no action was taken by them.

6. The petitioner has further submitted that in a similar case Thiru. K. Chinnadurai (8th respondent) serving as a Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, Thanthai Periyar College, Cuddalore also has been selected to the post of Lecturer on the basis of the certificate of experience purportedly issued by Annamalai University. On enquiry, under the RTI Act, it was found that the 8th respondent was also not teaching to the students and served only as a Research Officer. His employment was not under the University. Petitioner has contended that as per the categorical information given by the Public Information Officer, Annamalai University, they are not the competent authority to iss