Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1928 - HC - Indian LawsStoppage of salary - suppression of leave - It is the case of the writ petitioner that his salary has been stopped from the month of August, 2018 and he is greatly prejudiced by the same - submission of pension papers - HELD THAT:- I am unable to comprehend as to why the petitioner has suppressed the documents in relation to application for leave for 356 days made on April 19, 2018 while filing this writ petition. For him to get justice, it is required that he comes before this Court with clean hands. Suppression of all the 'leaves' that he has taken and admitted to is a material fact that is relevant in the present case as he is challenging the salary overdrawn by him, as a result of the unsanctioned leave taken by him in the school. Without producing these documents in Court, he has tried to create an impression that great injustice has been done to him by the school authorities for stopping the salary overdrawn on account of leave. These documents have not been disclosed in the writ petition and since these documents are the basis of the salary overdrawn calculated by the Administrator and provided to the petitioner the same amounts to suppression of material facts. Whether this Court sitting in its writ jurisdiction should take note of the material suppression by the writ petitioner and dismiss this writ petition? - HELD THAT:- The Indian and English Courts have consistently taken the view that one who approaches the Court must come with clean hands. It is the bounden duty of the Court to keep the stream of justice absolutely clean. Anyone who approaches must give full and fair disclosure of all the materials. The Courts must not allow anyone to abuse the Court process. In case the petitioner conceals anything that is known to be material such an action would lead to an inference of fraud, and even if not fraud, definitely would lead to a presumption that the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands - One must be even more careful when one approaches this Court in its extra ordinary jurisdiction for seeking a writ of mandamus and no person can be permitted to adopt dubious, dishonest and fraudulent means and make false averments or conceal the facts while submitting such a writ petition. If a person does so, not only is the petitioner not entitled to any relief from the Court but should be subject to exemplary costs so as to deter future litigants from pursuing a similar course of action. The writ petitioner has suppressed the material facts that should have been brought to the notice of this Court. This view of mine is buttressed by the fact that the documents produced by the respondent No. 5 referred to calculation of leave that has been made in the presence of the writ petitioner and were also handed over to him in the month of July, 2018. Furthermore, his own application for grant of special leave made in the month of April, 2018 has not been annexed to the writ petition - The petition having been filed on August 28, 2018, there are no justified reason as to why these documents were suppressed before this Court. Petition dismissed.
|