TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come to this Court with clean hands, has disentitled herself to be granted any relief. - Decided against the petitioner. - Case No. : C. W. P. No. 7678 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 18-12-2015 - MR. DEEPAK SIBAL, J. For The Petitioner : Mr. S. S. Dinarpur, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana, Mr. Arun Singal, Advocate D EEPAK SIBAL , J. : Through the present petition, the petitioner, who is serving the State of Haryana as Auxiliary Nurse Mid-wife (ANM), seeks to challenge her transfer from CHC Juan, Sonepat to CHC Taraori, Karnal. One of the main grounds pleaded in the petition are that from April 1986 to March 2015 i.e. for a period of about 29 years, the petitioner has remained posted outs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osure of the relevant facts. Its conduct must be above board. There should be no attempt by a party to mislead the Court. The petitioner is under an obligation to collect all material facts with due care and attention and he will not be heard to say that facts were not within his knowledge although the same could have come to his knowledge had he taken due care and had made efforts to find them out. The High Court will be fully justified in declining exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction in favour of a party who is guilty of suppression veri and suggestio falsi or who makes an attempt to mislead the Court. 14. In this case, the petitioner has made a deceitful attempt to mislead the Court and, therefore, we find little justification t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eived. On this consideration also the petitioners are not entitled to the exercise of the discretion of this Court in their favour so far as Article 226 of the Constitution is concerned. 21. In consequence, this petition of the petitioners is dismissed with costs, counsel's fee being ₹ 500/-. To the same effect is another Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Chiranji Lal and others vs. Financial Commissioner Haryana and others 1978 AIR (Punjab) 326, 9. It is, thus, plain that even at the stage the writ petition was filed, the petitioner therein were more than well aware that the identical issues of law and fact regarding which they claimed relief in this Court had already been already been conclusiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght to the notice of this Court at any stage on behalf of the writ petitioners. 10. In the aforesaid context, we cannot but hold that there has been mala fide and calculated suppression of material facts which, if disclosed would have disentitled the petitioners to the extraordinary remedy under the writ jurisdiction or in any case would have materially affected the merits on both the interim and ultimate relief claimed. We categorically reject the plea of the writ petitioners that the failure to mention all these material facts clearly within their knowledge was either inadvertent or was occasioned by any bona fide ommission. xx xx xx 13. Within this jurisdiction a Division Bench in Mr. U.C. Rekhi v. The Income Tax office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stream of justice by making patently false statements, cannot claim relief, especially under A rticle 136 o f the Constitution. While approaching the court, a litigant must state correct facts and come with clean hands. Where such statement of facts is based on some information, the source of such information must also be disclosed. Totally misconceived petition amounts to abuse of the process of the court and such a litigant is not required to be dealt with lightly, as a petition containing misleading and inaccurate statement, if filed, to achieve an ulterior purpose amounts to abuse of the process of the court. A litigant is bound to make full and true disclosure of facts ... [Emphasis supplied] On a similar issue, the Apex C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
