IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.534 of 2010 MANOJ KUMAR, son of late Madho Prasad, resident of At Village – Chak Hussaini (Khutia), P.O. Mansi, P S – Mansi, District – Khagaria. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the Secretary, Ministry of Rail, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Commercial Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur (Vaishali). 3. The Group General Manager, Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited, Eastern Zone Office, 3, Koilaghat Street, Ground Floor, Kolkata. 4. The Regional Manager, Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited, 4th Floor, Biscomaun Bhawan, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 5. M/s. Hotel Rajasthan, Khagaria, Dist – Khagaria. ----------- 05. 15.02.2010 Matter was ordered to be listed in top twenty cases on 2.2.2010 as a final indulgence to file a rejoinder. No rejoinder has been filed even today to the counter affidavit and counsel for the petitioner has chosen to argue the matter on the pleadings available on record. By way of the present writ application petitioner sought a direction upon the respondents for renewal of the licence for running refreshment room and stall at Mansi Railway Station and also for cancellation of settlement made in favour of respondent No.5. The ground urged is that this was done in surreptitious manner without proper advertisement and notice and this was done only with an object of defeating the right of the petitioner who is an old licensee for Mansi Railway Station. Petitioner also claims that he has a right for renewal and denial of the 2 same constitutes violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Respondents IRCTC Ltd. were directed to file their counter affidavit . In the counter affidavit statement has been made that the present writ application has been filed by suppressing vital facts to seek relief from this Court and in this regard certain evidence has been brought on record to show that the stand of the petitioner that no prior notice was issued or published before settlement is totally false because the petitioner has himself participated in the tender process for many a stations including Mansi, which would be evident from Annexure-E to the counter affidavit. The application etc. with signature of the petitioner is available on record. Only after petitioner failed to successfully bid for Mansi Railway Station that the writ application has been filed with misleading facts. The averment and evidence on record supports the contention of the respondents in this regard. If that be so, then the petitioner has tried to mislead the Court by making false and motivated statements suppressing the above facts in the writ application. Litigants of such kind must be deterred from sullying the stream of justice. They cannot get relief by making misleading statement and suppressing important and vital facts for begetting relief. 3 The writ application is fit to be dismissed on this ground and it is dismissed. A cost of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) is awarded upon the petitioner which shall be deposited within a month in favour of the Legal Services Authority, Patna High Court. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J )