IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WA.No. 360 of 2010 ----- -------------------- AGAINST JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 15969/2009 DATED 17.2.2010 APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ VARKEY, AGED 59, S/O.MATHEW, PULAKKUDY HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, PIN 683 546, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MUDAKUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY SECRETARY, MUDAKUZHA PO-683 546. 3. KURIAKOSE, S/O.PAILY, PATHICKAL HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, PIN 683 546, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 4. THE CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI-20. R1 BY SR..GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA R2 BY ADV.SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.SUNIL KUMAR R4 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.360 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 17th February, 2010 in W.P.(C) No.15969 of 2009, the unsuccessful writ petitioner has preferred the present writ appeal. 2. The appellant is running a Quail farm in his residential compound without appropriate licence from the concerned Panchayat. One of his neighbours complained to the Revenue Divisional Officer. In a meeting held by the Revenue Divisional Officer to resolve the dispute, the appellant gave an undertaking to close down his Quail farm by 31st May, 2009. 3. However, subsequently the appellant made an application to the Panchayat seeking appropriate licence for running the abovementioned farm. Eventually, the application of the appellant was rejected by order dated 23.5.2009 under Ext.P7. W.A. No.360 of 2010 - 2 - Aggrieved by the same, the appellant approached this Court by filing the writ petition. 4. The learned Judge by the judgment under appeal recorded in paragraph 3 of the judgment that the appellant is guilty of suppression of material facts inasmuch as the appellant did not mention about the undertaking given by him before the Revenue Divisional Officer. Though the learned Judge did not base his final decision on the abovementioned suppression, we are of the opinion that one fact is sufficient not to entertain the writ petition. Those who do not approach this Court with clean hands are not entitled for any consideration of their rights. In the circumstances, we do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. The writ appeal is dismissed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge vns