1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 2164 of 2009 (M/S) Swami Sachidanand Giri Chala Mahant Brahma Giri resident of Samadhi Dada Bhdha District Jhajhar, Haryana. . ……Petitioner. Versus 1. Union of India through its Secretary Ministry of Environment and Forest, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2. Chief Conservator of Forest, Uttarakhand, 87 Rajpur Road, Dehradun. 3. Divisional Forest Officer, Dehradun Forest Division, Tilak Road, Dehradun. 4. Range Forest Officer, Range Office, Dehradun Road, Reshikesh. …..Respondents. Sri A. K. Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Sri H.S. Rawal, Advocate (Central Govt.) for the respondent no. 1. Ms. Seema Sirohi, Advocate, for the respondent nos. 2 to 4. Date:- December 22, 2009 Hon’ble B.S. Verma J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful possession of the petitioner till the disposal of application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2. Vide order dated 8.12.2009, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rishikesh granted permission to institute the suit under Section 80(2) of the C.P.C. treating the urgency of the petitioner and on the same date time was granted to the respondents to file objection against the ad interim injunction application which was moved by the petitioner and the date fixed for the same is 2.1.2010. The proviso of sub Section (2) of Section 80 reads as under:- 2 “80 (2). A suit to obtain an urgent or immediate relief against the Government (including the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir) or any public officer in respect of any act purporting to be done by such public officer in his official capacity, may be instituted, with the leave of the Court, without serving any notice as required by sub-section (1); but the Court shall not grant relief in the suit, whether interim or otherwise, except after giving to the Government or public officer, as the case may be, a reasonable opportunity of showing cause in respect of the relief prayed for in the suit.” The court below in view of the proviso of sub Section (2) of Section 80 has rightly issued notice to the respondents to file objection. The interim relief can only be granted after hearing the respondents when the suit is instituted under Section 80 (2) with the leave of the court. The relief sought cannot be granted to the petitioner in view of the mandatory provision of sub section (2) of Section 80. The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. However, it is provided that the trial court shall expedite the proceedings of temporary injunction application pending before it as expeditiously as possible. All the pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (B.S. Verma, J.) 22.12.2009 RMY 3