(1.) By way this review petition, the petitioner, University is seeking review of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.4865/2014 dated 16.6.2016.
(2.) Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submits that certain dates and events are necessary for proper appreciation of the grounds taken in the review petition. It is submitted that W.P.No.4865/2014 was filed on 19.3.2014 against an order of cancellation of appointment dated 25.3.2013. As per the claim of the respondent employee, he submitted his joining pursuant to the appointment order before the University on 17.10.2012. In the writ petition, he assailed the impugned order whereby the appointment order was cancelled but did not ask for any relief of salary or financial benefits. It is submitted by learned Sr. Counsel that the writ petition was allowed on the basis of document dated 12/13.11.2013 (Annexure P-10) wherein visit of respondent employee to the University was admitted but it was mentioned that such a visit was his 'personal visit'. It is further mentioned that the university has not maintained any record regarding said visit. Learned Sr. Counsel further submits that along with the review petition, the university has filed certain relevant documents which were not in their possession at the time of filing of the reply. The discovery of these new documents which could not be filed despite due diligence along with the return in the main case, throw light that the respondent employee is guilty of suppression of material facts. He did not approach the court with the clean hands and for these reasons alone he is not entitled for any relief in equitable jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Learned Sr. Counsel submits that certain documents will show that if these documents would have been filed in the main case, this Court would not have granted relief to the original petitioner. She submits that these grounds are analogous to the grounds flowing from Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC.