JUDGMENT : 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. In this intra court appeal, the appellant has assailed the validity of the order dated 18th July, 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge, by which prayer for interim relief made by the appellant has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in as many as ten writ petitions, different Benches of this Court have entertained the writ petitions and have granted the interim orders, however, in the case of appellant, the prayer for interim relief has been rejected. It is further submitted that there is a need of consistency even in respect of passing an interim order. 4. The fact that in similar writ petitions, the ad interim orders have been granted by various Benches of this Court, which is not disputed by the learned Government Advocate and it is submitted by him that he has filed an application for vacation of the aforesaid interim order. 5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The Supreme Court in the case of “Vishnu Traders Vs. State of Haryana and others, reported as 1995 Supp (1) SCC 461” has held that though in respect of interlocutory orders, the principles of binding precedent does not apply, however, need for consistency in approach and uniformity in exercise of the judicial discretion respecting similar cases requires that all similar matters to receive similar treatment except where factual differences require different treatment. 6. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law by the Supreme Court and taking into account the fact that the writ petitions involving similar issue are pending consideration before the learned Single Judge, in which interim orders have admittedly been granted, we are inclined to set aside the order dated 18th July, 2017, in so far as it pertains to refusal to grant of the interim relief to the appellant. Accordingly, it is directed that status-quo with regard to the possession in respect of the property in question shall be maintained by the parties till next date of hearing. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the instant appeal is, accordingly, disposed of along with connected MP. 8. Let OWP No. 1120/2017 be listed for analogous hearing alongwith OWP Nos. 661/2005, 1010/2007, 1586/2015, 1547/2015, 1519/2015, 1566/2015, 535/2016, 547/2016 and alongwith the case of “Jehangir Ahmed Mir Vs. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the instant appeal is, accordingly, disposed of along with connected MP. 8. Let OWP No. 1120/2017 be listed for analogous hearing alongwith OWP Nos. 661/2005, 1010/2007, 1586/2015, 1547/2015, 1519/2015, 1566/2015, 535/2016, 547/2016 and alongwith the case of “Jehangir Ahmed Mir Vs. State” before the learned Single Judge as per roster.