IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.WP. No. 5368 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 01.02.2011 Ashwani Kumar ....Petitioner versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present : Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocate for the petitioner/applicant Mr. Vikas Cuccria, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Ajay Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.5. **** M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral) What is not disputed here is that during the pendency of this writ petition, respondent No. 3 has passed orders dated 18.11.2010 (Annexure P-20) and 19.11.2010 (Annexure P-21). At the very outset, learned counsel intends to withdraw the writ petition to enable the petitioner to avail his statutory remedy in this respect. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Needless to mention here that in order to avoid the possibility of multiplicity of litigation, it is directed that respondent No. 5 will not create third- party rights in the property in dispute, in any manner, for a period of one month to enable the petitioner to avail his remedy along with stay application. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge February 01, 2011 G.Arora