IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 24TH BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 2025 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN RP.453/2009 IN WPC 4586/2009 Dated 13/08/2009 .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT IN RP: ---------------------------------------- P.M. JALAJA, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O. LATE BALAKRISHNAN, CHANIYAMURI HOUSE, SUDHARMA ROAD, THEVARA, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENTS/REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6 IN RP: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. C.G. OOMMEN, S/O. GEORGE, CHAVANICKAMANNIL HOUSE, PERUMANOOR P.O., KOCHI-15. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE TAKSHILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, KOCHI. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 5. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI. 6. COCHIN PORT TRUST, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY CONSERVATOR, KOCHI. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.T. THOMAS R2 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 2025 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge in RP No.453 of 2009 allowing the Review Petition and dismissing the writ petition, the present appeal is filed. 2. The appellant approached this Court aggrieved by the alleged perverse and arbitrary action of the official respondents directing her to be evicted from the premises in question in Kayal puramboke. The main grievance made before the learned Single Judge was that there was no opportunity of hearing given by the authorities before passing the impugned order. Based on this submission, the learned Single Judge, by order dated 12.02.09, allowed the writ petition and directed the 2nd respondent in the writ petition to consider the objections of the petitioner and pass appropriate order. WA No.2025 of 2009 -:2:- 3. The review petitioner who was respondent No.6 in the writ petition, noting the fact that there was suppression of fact, filed the review petition, bringing it to the notice of the learned single Judge that the contention of the writ petitioner that there was no notice or opportunity of hearing was given is totally false. According to him, as per Ext.R1(a), copy of the notice, indicates this falsity on the part of the writ petitioner. 4. It is to be noted that as admitted by the writ petitioner, in fact, notice was issued to the writ petitioner intimating that a hearing was fixed on 12.01.09. There is not much dispute of the fact that in pursuance of the same, the writ petitioner did appear on 12.01.09 before the authority and as such the contention of the writ petitioner in the impugned writ petition that she had not been issued any notice or opportunity of hearing was not given, was found to be false. In the light of the false statement made before the Court, the learned Single Judge deemed it proper to recall the order dated 12.02.09 and dismissed the writ petition only on the ground of suppression of facts. WA No.2025 of 2009 -:3:- 5. It is settled principle that a person must approach the Court with clean hands and if suppression of fact is found out, he is certainly not entitled to any relief from the Court. That is exactly what has been followed by the learned Single Judge. We find absolutely no reason to interfere with such findings in the Review Petition and hence dismiss the writ appeal upholding the order passed in the Review Petition dated 13.08.09. It is also to be noted that even while allowing the Review Petition the learned Single Judge has indicated that the writ petitioner can challenge the orders impugned in the writ petition before the statutory authority, if such remedy is available. Keeping this observation in mind, we dismiss the Writ Appeal. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. A.K. Basheer, ttb/vku. Judge.