(1) INDIAN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE Nos. 3 and 4 are granted. Legal representatives of Petitioner 1 are permitted to be brought on record.

(2) SO far as INDIAN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, we are informed that as Petitioner 3 had died pending proceedings in the High court, an application for bringing the legal representatives of Petitioner 3 on record was also filed in the High court and that is granted. Accordingly, these lAs are also granted. The legal representatives of Petitioner 3 are permitted to be broug on record as they are already brought on record by the High court.

(3) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners invited our attention to a three-Judge bench judgment of this court in Union of India v. Ram Mehar and also later two decisions of two-Judge benches of this court in Periyar and Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. v. State of Kerala and Narain Das Jain v. Agra Nagar Mahapalika. Relying on these judgments, he submitted that for applicability of Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 solatium has to be considered as a component of compensation and interest could be paid thereon; and that the High court has wrongly not granted interest o