A.P.MISRA, J.

(1) THE Union of India has challenged the impugned order of the High Court quashing the acquisition proceedings on the ground that there was no urgency for applying Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act on the facts and circumstances of this case which is under challenge before us.

(2) THE short facts are. Under Hill Road, Delhi the appellant along with 13 others built up properties which were earlier requisitioned under Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 which was subsequently notified for acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acqusition Act. Thereafter on 10/03/1987 under Section 6 emergency power under Section 17 of the said Act were invoked by issuing notification under it. The ground for exercising of emergency power was said to be on account of acquisition of Government Offices and Government residential accommodation. The High Court quashed the impugned notification by following its earlier decision in Banwari Lal and Sons v. Union of India decided on 4/02/1991 in which this very notification was quashed. It is not in dispute that subject-matter including the notification under Land Acquisition where the same except that in Banwari Lal it was the Government housing for the officers while in the present case it is housing for the offices. The said decision of the High Court stood confirmed when this Court dismissed the SLP filed by the Union of India. We do not find any sustainable ground raised in the present appeal to make any distinct or difference from the one in the case of Banwari Lal and Sons. Accordingly, there is no error committed by the High Court in making the decision and dismissing the same. Accordingly the present appeal has no merits and it is dismissed.

(3) COSTS on the parties. Appeal dismissed.