From the perusal of the pleadings that have come to be raised before this Court, it is absolutely clear that it is a case where the total strategy of hide and seek by the petitioner and as a sequel to that caveat has been avoided by framing the writ petition in a manner of seeking a writ of mandamus instead of challenging the order part of which only has been annexed as annexure-2 to the writ petition. There is no denial of the fact that there was some detailed order passed on 31st May, 2019. This is a mischievous act of a litigant approaching this Court for an equitable relief. One who plays with law, in our opinion must also be ready to bear the consequences and one who pleads equity must come with clean hands. Narration of false facts if deliberately incorporated in the pleadings, the first consequence is dismissal of petition. The question thus is, who would pay the cost of public time consumed and public money spent in the creating and maintaining forums for dispensation of justice. The answer would be plain and simple that one who taxed others for sheer wastage of time and caused unnecessary burden on public exchequer, such an unscrupulous litigant as the petitioner is in the present case, is liable to be imposed exemplary cost to make it an eye opener for others.
