IMPORTANT POINT
Last of the series of the publication referred to under Section 6(2) of the Land Acquisition Act is relevant for the purposes for making award under Section 11-A of the Act.

JUDGMENT

D. Raju, J.-This appeal has been filed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court dated 23.7.1998 in W.A. No.166 of 1994B, whereunder while allowing the appeal and setting aside judgment of the learned single Judge, the Court held that the acquisition proceedings initiated to acquire the land in question by publishing a Notification dated 31.7.1984 have lapsed due to delay in passing the award and set aside the proceedings leaving liberty with the authorities to take fresh acquisition proceedings, if it is so desired, in accordance with law.

2. On the initiation of acquisition proceedings, O.P. No.7812-N came to be filed in the High Court and interim orders were obtained preventing the authorities from proceeding with the acquisition and taking possession. The same came to be disposed of finally by a Division Bench on 16.7.1987 with certain directions permitting the landowners to file their objections within a period of 30 days which the District Collector was obliged to dispose of in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act. It was also directed that if the objections were overruled and Notification is issued to acquire the land, further steps for passing the award should be taken expeditiously and the landowners would be entitled to stake their claims for compensation and vindicate them in accordance with law. The order of the High Court also recited that as the authorities were precluded from taking further action under the Act by interim orders of stay granted by the High Court it was agreed that the period during which the O.P. was pending shall be excluded for the purpose of issuing Notification under Section 6 of the Act. As the finalisation of the proceedings after conducting a due enquiry was under progress, O.P. No. 4885 of 1988 appears to have been filed by the landowners. Though in the meantime the declaration under Section 6 was approved by the Government on 14.3.1990 and came to be published in the Government Gazette on 17.3.1990, it came to be published, as envisaged in the Act, in the local Newspapers on 21.5.1992, apparently after the O.P. No.4885 of 1988 was disposed of on 3.3.1992 with directions to complete acquisition proceedings and pass an award within a period of six months. Thereafter, the High Court by an order dated 19.9.1992 seems to have granted further time of 3 months from 3.9.1992 to complete the land acquisition proceedings. The award enquiry was being conducted from time to time and as the proceedings were in progress, O.P. No. 1534 of 1993 was said to have been filed in January, 1993 and initially interim orders of stay seem to have been granted and extended from time to time thereafter till almost the final disposal of O.P. No.1534 of 1993 on 20.1.1994. In the meantime, on 27.8.1993 Final Award came to be passed.

3. The learned Single Judge, while dismissing O.P. No.1534 of 1993, was of the view that since the landowners have ventured to institute series of litigations questioning the acquisition proceedings at one stage or another, there is no merit in the challenge made to the acquisition proceedings having lapsed under Section 11-A of the Act. The learned Single Judge further observed that the petitioners before the Court even then had no objection for the acquisition of 43 cents of land and that their objection for the acquisition in excess of the said extent was not tenable. Not satisfied, they pursued the matter further on appeal which the Division Bench allowed as noticed supra, driving the department to approach this Court with the above appeal.

4. The learned Additional Solicitor General contended on behalf of the appellant that the acquisition proceedings, culminating in the award made on 27.8.1993 could not be held to have lapsed by the mandate of Section 11-A of the Act and that having regard to the intervening court proceedings and interim orders passed therein and need to calculate the two years period for purposes of Section