(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) WE have heard learned counsel on both sides.

(3) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the division bench of the Delhi High court made on 14/7/1992 in LPA No. 36 of 1992 dismissing the LPA. The learned Single Judge had allowed the Writ Petition No. 936 of 1989 on the ground that there was no justification for invoking the urgency clause in Section 17(4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894 (for short "the Act"). Accordingly, the learned Single Judge quashed the declaration under Section 6. The division bench dismissed the LPA on the ground that there was inordinate delay of more than 200 days in filing the appeal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

(4) WHEN the matter had come up before us and the respondents pointed out that the land involved is only two bighas and, therefore, it is not a case warranting interference. We directed the learned counsel for the Union of India to find out as to why they are insisting upon decision on merits. A statement was made by Shri K.T.S. Tuisi, learned Additional Solicitor General that there are number of cases of the similar nature pending in the High court awaiting t