ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, ACTG. C. J.-Leave was granted to the appellant in this case mainly to consider whether the High Court had not erred in dismissing his writ petition In limine, in view of the contentions raised before this Court at the bearing of the C.P.L.A.
2. The facts giving rise to the appeal, briefly, are that Abdul Hafeez was employed in the Board 'of Secondary Education. He was charge-sheeted on 31-8-1971 and was compulsorily retired on 7-1- 1972. He filed an appeal before the Board which was dismissed on 10-2-1972. He there filed a suit against his retirement on 11-5-1973 and shortly thereafter on 19-5-1973 also filed a writ petition challenging his compulsory retirement before the High Court. In the writ petition he made no mentions that he had also filed a suit in the Civil Court with regard to the same matter. The learned Judge in Chamber dismissed the writ petition with the following observation :- "Besides, the fact that the petitioner availed of an adequate remedy in the nature of a Civil Suit before coming to this Court would also disentitle him from invoking this special jurisdiction for obtaining the same relief. In view of the failure of the petitioner to disclose the fact that - he had filed the suit and having already availed of an alternative remedy, this writ petition is not competent and is dismissed in limine."
Feeling aggrieved by this order the appellant filed a petition before this Court and Leave was granted inter alia to consider the effect of withdrawal of the suit by the appellant before the petition was heard by the High Court.
3. We have beard the learned counsel for the appellant only on the question of the `suppression' of facts referred to in the impugned order because it was mainly on that account that the learned High Court Judge had dismissed his writ petition.
Having considered the matter we feel that the appellant had indeed suppressed a material fact in the writ petition and, therefore, he was rightly denied relief under its discretionary jurisdiction by the High Court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed as having no merit.