AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
J. Chelameswar, C.J.—Aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.04.2010 in W.P.(C) No. 28104 of 2005, the unsuccessful Petitioner therein preferred the instant appeal. The Writ Petition is filed claiming that the Petitioner, who is a retired employee of the State of Kerala is entitled to have his past service, rendered to the Kerala State Electricity Board prior to joining the service of the State of Kerala, reckoned for the purpose of calculating his retirement benefits. The learned Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows:
He also points out that the Petitioner has not chosen to disclose the said fact in the Writ Petition. In view of the fact that the Petitioner has suffered an adverse order from the Kerala Lok Ayukta which was rendered as early as on 28.06.2005 and that he has not chosen to challenge the same, I do not think that the Petitioner can invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, that too without disclosing the fact that he had suffered an adverse order from the Kerala Lok Ayukta. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed.
The above extract is self explanatory and we do not see any reason to interfere with the conclusion reached by the learned Judge as it is well settled principle of law that the parties who approach this Court invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India must come with clean hands, disclosing all the relevant facts which are within their knowledge.
In the said circumstances, we do not see any merit in the writ appeal and it is dismissed.