IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26088 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------- MANJU SUDARSANAN, M/S. LEKSHMI CHEMICALS, SHIVAM, ELAKAMON P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF RURAL EMPLOYMENT, GENERATION PROGRAMME, KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES COMMISSION, GRAMODAYA, 3RD IRLA ROAD, VILEPARLE (WEST), MUMBAI – 400056. 3. THE MANAGER, INDIA OVERSEAS BANK, AYIROOR BRANCH, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, SC,I.O.BANK FOR R3 SRI. K.P. HARISH -SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.26088 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(i) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to give the balance Margin Money of Rs.1,65,000/- within a time limit fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (ii) to declare that the Ext.P-3 Circular No.REGP/M- 556 (Kerala) 2005-06 dated 25/4/2005 issued by the 2 nd respondent has no retrospective effect and hence it is not applicable to the petitioner's case. (iii) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, directing the 1 st respondent to dispose of Ext.P-5 Representation, forthwith”. The very same petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(C) No.10273/2005, in which this Court had passed the following judgment. “The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers:- “(ii) To issue a writ of certiorari or such other W.P.(c)No.26088/08 2 appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P5 order by which the value of the vehicle is excluded from the total cost by which the value of purpose of sanctioning margin money assistance; (iii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to get margin money assistance on the basis of the cost of the project as Rupees Ten Lakhs as per Ext.P1 project report. (iv) To issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the 2 nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a time limit that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” In case Ext.P6 appeal has not so far been disposed of, there will be a direction to the 2 nd respondent/competent authority to dispose of the same with notice to the petitioner within four months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment.”. The writ petition is disposed of as above.” From the judgment, it is clear that prayer number three made by the petitioner in that writ petition is the same prayer as in this writ petition. The petitioner has not even cared to mention the fact that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court for the same relief. He has also not cared to state as to the result of the appeal, which was directed to be disposed of, in that judgment. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has suppressed material facts and has not approached this Court W.P.(c)No.26088/08 3 with clean hands. Accordingly, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Hence the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd