Judgment

RAY, C. J.:- There are two principal questions in these writ petitions and civil appeals. First, is compensation which is related to the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act referred to as the Act bad? Second, is planned development of Delhi bad and vague ?

2. This Court in Aflatoon v. Governor of Delhi, AIR 1974 SC 2077 held that the notification dated 13 November, 1959 under Section 4 of the Act which is also being challenged in these writ petitions and appeals is beyond challenge now.

3. Piecemeal acquisition which was held to be bad in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Vishnu Prasad Sharma (1966) 3 SCR 557 was validated by the Land Acquisition Amendment and Validation Act with retrospective effect. The validity of the Amending Act has been upheld by this Court in Udai Ram Sharma v. Union of India (1968) 3 S. C. R. 41 and reaffirmed in Aflatoon s case (supra).

4. The contention that piecemeal acquisition under Notification dated 13 November, 1969 under Section 4 of the Act is bad is really a challenge to the adequacy of compensation under Section 23 of the Act. The Act is protected under Article 31 (5) of the Constitution. Where acquisition is for publi