HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petitio n No.400 of 2010 (M/S) Ashok Tumbadiya .…Petitioner Versus Haridwar Development Authority & another ..Respondents Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Puja Banga, Advocate for the respondents. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This petition was filed in the month of March, 2010 in which following objection was noted by the Registry. i. Application endorsed is not signed by learned Advocate. ii. Enrolment and Bar numbers not shown in the Vakalatnama. iii. Typed copy of Annexure no.2 is required. The perusal of the order sheet shows that on 19.05.2010 Registrar Judicial granted time up to 03.08.2010 to the counsel for the petitioner to remove the defects but defects were not removed. Therefore, the matter was placed before this Court. 2 Mr. Tapan Singh holding brief of Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner prayed that one week further time be granted to him to remove defects. Prayer is rejected. Ms. Puja Banga, Advocate for the respondents informed the Court that earlier also the petitioner filed writ petition no.135 of 2009 challenging the order dated 03.03.2009 which is under challenge in this petition. She further submitted that petitioner has not disclosed this fact in the instant petition. The petitioner has not removed defects though time was granted to him upto 03.08.2010. The writ petition deserves to be dismissed on this ground. It is also found that petitioner has concealed a material fact that he has already filed another writ against the same order dated 03.03.2009. Therefore, in view of this fact, the writ petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs.2,000/-to be paid in the State Legal Services Authority. Civil Misc. Application No.1817 of 2010 stands rejected. (V.K.Bist. J,) 04.08.2010 Arti 3