The purpose of this research is to assess the feasibility of the Iranian Administrative Court of Justice’s judicial practice in protecting public rights by issuing interim orders to annul government decisions. The fundamental question of this research refers to the fact that the Iranian Administrative Court of Justice, within the framework of current laws, has sufficient capacity to issue effective interim orders and how can the experiences of the French Supreme Administrative Court in this field be benefited? To answer this question, the judicial practice of the two courts has been compared from a legal, judicial and operational perspective. The findings indicate that in the Iranian legal system, the criteria for issuing interim orders, such as necessity, irreparability and apparent probability of the correctness of the claim, are defined in general terms and without operational details, which leads to broad interpretations and lack of effective use of this tool. Also, administrative obstacles and slow judicial processes reduce the effectiveness of the court’s decisions. In contrast, the French Supreme Administrative Court functions more efficiently by using precise criteria, judicial independence and effective cooperation with executive institutions. The results of the research indicate that in order to strengthen the judicial practice of the Iranian Administrative Justice Court, the criteria for issuing temporary orders should be made clearer, the independence of the Court should be strengthened, and technology should be used to facilitate judicial processes.