1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The challenge to the notifications issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 18.08.1981 was subject matter of challenge before the High Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 77449 of 2005 (Jasvir Singh v. State of U.P) filed by the present petitioners.
3. In the writ petition various pleas were raised for the purposes of challenging the said land acquisition notification.
4. The Division Bench noticed amongst others that the objection of the Chief Standing Counsel to the fact that the writ petition had been filed after more than 24 years of the publication of the notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and after 19 years from the date of taking possession of the land. It was also noticed that the petitioners after the Award dated 22.09.1986 had made applications for Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking enhancement of the compensation which reference was registered as Reference No. 91 of 1987 and no. 27 of 1987. Reference aforesaid were ultimately decided on 07.12.1988 The petitioners not being satisfied with the order of the learned District Judge passed in the Reference Petition filed First Appeal No. 880 of 1983 and First Appeal No. 408 of 1988.
5. The Court thereafter went to hold that the writ petition as filed by the petitioners was hopelessly barred by laches, therefore, refused to entertain any issue pertaining to the acquisition proceedings.
6. Against the said order of the Division Bench, the petitioners filed Special Leave to Appeals No. 27554-27555 of 2014 (Jasvir Singh v. Land Acquisition Officer). The appeal came to be dismissed by means of the following order:
“The rights of the petitioners in respect of the claim falling under Section 24(1)(A) can also be worked out based on the outcome of any proceedings petitioner chooses to raise under the New Land Acquisition Act.
The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed with the above observations.”
7. On the strength of the observations made by the Apex Court permitting the petitioners to ventilate their grievance, if any, permissible under Section 24(1-A) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the present writ petition has been filed for declaring the entire land acquisition proceedings under the notifications dated 18.08.1981 as having lapsed.
8. Counsel for the petitioner contended before us that the Award has yet not been made, therefore, the proceedings would lapse.
9. From the facts as noticed herein above, we are of the considered opinion that not only the Award had been made, the petitioners had also filed a Reference Application which was rejected and against the Reference Order, they filed First Appeal, referred to above, which has also been dismissed. There is no substance in the allegations made.
10. Writ petition is dismissed.
11. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.