VIJAY KUMAR BHARADWAJ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, claiming following reliefs:

(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:

(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.