IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No. 345 of 2010 Date of Decision: 22.09.2010 Achhar Singh …Petitioner. Versus. Hateshwari Educational Society and others …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No. For the petitioner: Mr. R.L.Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents: None. Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) 1. This petition is misconceived since the petitioner by means of this writ petition has prayed for setting aside the stay order granted in one case and also prayed that in the suit filed by him stay should be granted. 2. From the averments made in the petition it appears that one suit has been filed by Hateshwari Educational Society, which is pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Court No.III, Mandi, in which an order has been passed directing the petitioner to maintain status-quo qua the land in dispute. It appears that the petitioner has also filed another suit but that is 2 pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Court No.IV, Mandi. In that suit, the petitioner has filed an application for grant of stay but no order has been passed in the same. A common petition with regard to both the suits is obviously not maintainable. Even otherwise, the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of approaching the learned trial Court for vacation of the stay order passed against him or filing an appeal before the District Judge. It is settled law that party must avail all the remedies available to him under general law before approaching this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. Faced with this situation, Shri Chaudhary, seeks leave to withdraw the petition with liberty reserved to the petitioner to apply for the vacation of the stay order in one case and to move an application for grant of stay order in the case filed by him. Since the property in both the case is the same, the parties are identical, it would be appropriate if the petitioner approaches the District Judge or the trial Court for consolidation of both the suits so that both the cases are heard by one Judge and conflicting orders are 3 not passed. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 22nd September, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) ™ Judge.