IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.DENESAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2007 / 19TH MAGHA 1928 WP(C).No. 29385 of 2006(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ CHANDRALEKHA.K., CHOCKANDI ESTATE, EAST DIVISION, MUNNAR P.O., IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.VIJAYAN SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.K.DENESAN, J. ========================= W.P.(C).No.29385 OF 2006-W. ========================= Dated this the 8th day of February, 2007. J U D G M E N T The petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing WP(C).No.148 of 2006 along with 20 others seeking almost identical reliefs. This Court considered the matter elaborately and found that the petitioners were not entitled for the reliefs. Accordingly, WP(C).No.148 of 2006 was dismissed as per judgment dated 31-3-2006. These facts are concealed by the petitioner in this writ petition. 2. On the sole ground that the petitioner has suppressed a material fact, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed without going into the merits of her case. I thought of dismissing this case with exemplary costs. But the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not guilty of wilful suppression. Though she had subscribed her signature to the earlier writ petition along with some others what happened thereafter was not known to her. She hails from a remote village in the high ranges and it is prayed that she may be forgiven this time. Though the above statements themselves do not WP(C).No.29385 of 2006. 2 afford sufficient cause or justification for filing a writ petition before this Court without disclosing facts and vital information, I think the petitioner deserves indulgence. Any observation made by this Court while imposing costs will affect her future adversely. Counsel submits that she has learned a lesson and will show proper diligence and care, hereafter. Having regard to the above submissions, I refrain from imposing costs. The writ petition is dismissed without any order as to costs. K.K.DENESAN, JUDGE. kvs/-