Published on :
“The requirement is that you have to supply all information so that one is approaching court with clean hands. That is the minimum expectation,” observed the bench.
During the hearing, Senior advocate Uday Holla, appearing for the respondent, informed the Court that certain information regarding the petitioner’s antecedents had not been disclosed.
The petitioners argued that the case in question was registered maliciously.
The Court, however, refused to accept the argument and said that compliance with the rules requiring disclosure of such information, was important.
“You are asking us to scrutinise the reasons. We are on basic proposition that petitioner must approach court with clean hands. Its not an atomic formula, it is very simple.”
Therefore, dismissing the petition on this ground, the bench noted that the issue may be considered if someone with clean hands approaches the court.
In the PIL, the petitioner had called into question the proposed construction near Nandi Hills and claimed that he was espousing the cause of the general public with respect to the illegal utilisation and exploitation of the land for the purpose of business.
The petitioner had contended that the government has allowed the Isha Yoga Centre to damage the ecosystem in Nandi Hills in violation of environmental laws. It was their stand that this would have a direct impact on the lives of people and wild animals in the area.
During the previous hearing, the High Court had allowed Isha Foundation to proceed with the unveiling of the 112-ft tall bust of the Adiyogi Shiva statue near Nandi Hills on January 15.