ORDER

We have heard learned counsel for the parties in these review applications. On 3.8.1999 during the course of hearing of these applications the following order was passed :

"Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has drawn our attention to para graph 10 of the impugned judgment (since reported in Angarki Coop. Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [JT 1996(11) SC 576 : (1997) 9 SCC 713] and has stated that the averments made therein are factually incorrect. He has specially drawn our attention to the following observations :

"...We are of the view that even if the contention of Mr. Sibal is accepted the reasoning of the High Court would still be fully applicable in the facts of the present case. No authority from the Collector to the Chief Minister ever applied his mind to the requirement of clause 11 of the Resolution. It was no-body s case that the plot was isolated or isolated procedure was to be followed. All the authorities/officers concerned were acting under the influence of Ranganathan and nobody was even conscious of clause 11 of the Resolution or any other statutory provision. After giving our thoughtful consider