C.O.C.P.Nos.644 and 840 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1.C.O.C.P.No.644 of 2008 Telu Ram ...Petitioner Versus Rita Rani and others ...Respondents 2.C.O.C.P.No.840 of 2008 Gram Panchayat, Village Jhinjri. ...Petitioner Versus Telu Ram and others ...Respondents Date of Decision:-11.8.2009 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr.Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Naresh Kaushal, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): This order of mine shall dispose of COCP Nos.644 and 840 of 2008. In both the petitions, petitioners are alleging disobedience of the same order i.e. order dated 27.2.2008 passed in CWP No.2880 of 2008. This Court vide its order dated 27.2.2008 passed in CWP No.2880 of 2008 directed the parties to maintain status-quo. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by this Court having been C.O.C.P.Nos.644 and 840 of 2008 2 rendered infructuous vide judgment dated 11.7.2008 (Annexure R1/A). While disposing of the aforesaid writ petition, it was further held that the interim order dated 27.2.2008 passed by this Court shall continue to be effective till the application for interim stay filed by the petitioner before the Statutory Authority before whom the appeal was pending, is disposed of. It is again not disputed by either of the parties that even the statutory appeal which was pending before the Director Panchayats, Punjab has been disposed of by the aforesaid authority and the parties are in litigation before this Court in a fresh writ petition i.e. CWP No.7014 of 2009. Be that as it may, since the interim order dated 27.2.2008 has come to an end on passing of the orders in the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner, I am not inclined to proceed further with these petitions. Rule discharged in both the petitions. However, the parties will be at liberty to seek their remedy in accordance with law for redressal of their grievances, if any. (Rakesh Kumar Garg) 11.8.2009 Judge AS