IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 7919 of 2010 Date of decision: August 3, 2011 Aruna Sood Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting : Yes For the Petitioner : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate For Respondents.1&2: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General and Mr.J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No.3: Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and judgment dated 25.11.2008 passed in CWP (T) No. 8905 (OA No. 2328/2007), by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Hon’ble Court may kindly be declared inconsequential and inoperative qua the petitioner which has been obtained behind the back of the petitioner.” 2 2. According to the petitioner, she is not made a party to the writ petition, though she is one of the affected parties. It is also submitted that she is directly affected by the judgment of this Court in CWP(T) No. 8905 of 2008 and hence the present writ petition for declaration that the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the said case is inconsequential and inoperative qua the petitioner. 3. We are afraid, the contentions cannot be appreciated. The judgment in a writ petition cannot be avoided by filing another writ petition. The remedy open to the petitioner is either to file a third party review or to file a third party appeal. One of the principles behind such a well settled position is to avoid multiplicity of litigations and to prevent abuse, if not misuse of process of the Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has since filed an LPA. In view of the above submissions, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the liberty to the petitioner to pursue all contentions in the appeal. 5. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. ( Justice Kurian Joseph ), Chief Justice August 3, 2011 (K) ( Justice Rajiv Sharma ), Judge