THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition (M/S) No. 180 of 2006 1. Dhir Singh, 2. Shakti Singh, Both sons of Mangat Singh, R/O village Liberheri, Tahsil Roorkee District Haridwar. …… Petitioner. Versus 1. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Roorkee, Haridwar. 2. State of Uttaranchal through Collector Haridwar. 3. Chief Secretary, State of Uttaranchal, Dehradun. 4. Land Acquisition Officer, District Haridwar. 5. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samitee, Manglour through Its Secretary Pargana Manglour, Tahsil Roorkee, Haridwar. 6. Managing Director, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samitee Haldwani, District Nainital, Uttaranchal, 7. The Chairman/S.D.M. Roorkee, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Manglour, Haridwar. 8. Uttaranchal Power Corporation through Executive Engineer/ Sub Division Officer, Transmission Circle Roorkee, Tahsil Roorkee, District Haridwar. 9. Executive Engineer/Sub Division Officer, Transmission Circle Roorkee, Power Corporation Roorkee, District Haridwar. … Respondents. Sri S.K.Mandal, Adv., learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Nand Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. Sri B.D. Upadhyay, Adv., learned counsel for respondents 8 & 9. Dated March 02, 2006. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard learned counsel. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for issue of a direction to the respondent no.1 to decide the application 6-C dated 4-2-2005 moved under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with 2 Section 151 C.P.C. in Original Suit No. 20 of 2005, Dheer Singh and others Vs. Uttaranchal State, expeditiously. Relevant facts are that the plaintiff-petitioners filed a suit for mandatory injunction against the State of Uttaranchal and others, which was registered as Civil Suit No. 20 of 2005 in the court below on 4.2.2005. The plaintiffs also moved application for temporary injunction (6-C). Against the said application respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 filed objection paper no. 24-C. According to the petitioners, the application for temporary injunction has not been decided, which is causing irreparable loss and injury to the plaintiff-petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Roorkee, Haridwar, to decide the application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C. (paper no. 6-C) moved by the plaintiff-petitioners in the aforesaid Civil Suit No. 20 of 2005 expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the said observation, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S. Verma, J.) RCP