- (1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, claiming following reliefs: i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to consider the petitioner's grievance as contained in his representation dated 15. 1. 2009. ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to re-calculate the Index Marks of the petitioner with Ph. D. degree and other candidates i. e. respondent no. 4 and 5 for holding as to who has highest indexing mark for the post of Principal of Public Inter College, Puranpur, District Pilibhit. "
(2.) ON presentation of writ petition, Sri A. K. Saxena, Advocate, representing respondent No. 4 has filed short counter affidavit an has disclosed before this Court the petitioner had already filed writ petition No. 4676 of 2009, Vinay Kumar Bharadwaj vs. State of U. P. and others for following reliefs, which are being quoted below: a. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Chairman/secretary, U. P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad to respondent no. 2 to re-calculate the Index Marks of the petitioner and other candidates i. e. respondent no. 3 and 4 for holding as to who has the highest indexing mark for being appointed on the the post of Principal, Public Inter College, Puranpur, District Pilibhit, after taking into account the Ph. D. degree's marks of the petitioner, which he obtained in the year 2000. b. Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. c. award cost of petition to the petitioner. " (SIDHARTH VERMA)Counsel for the petitioner chamber 106, High Court, Allahabad"
(3.) BY filing present writ petition, the petitioner has concealed the factum of earlier writ petition filed before this Court, whereas in earlier writ petition also the affidavit was sworn by the petitioner himself. Consequently on the same set of facts one writ petition had already been filed, then second writ petition filed by petitioner concealing the factum of earlier writ petition is gross untruthful misconduct of the petitioner, as such this writ petition deserves to dismissed with cost, as the petitioner has not come this Court with clean hands.;