JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.

1. Leave granted in both the SLPs.

2. These appeals involving common questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. On the requisition of M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd. (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as the `SAIL') for establishment of a steel plant at Salem commonly known as Salem Steel Plant, 3651 acres of land was acquired wherefor a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as `the Act') was issued in the year 1964 and a declaration under Section 6 was published in 1969.

4. Land acquisition proceedings for preparation of awards were initiated in 1971 during the period 1971 to 1975. 305 awards were made. A large number of landholders being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded to them by the Land Acquisition Officer received the same without protest.

5. Some of the land owners, however, at the time of passing of the award being not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded in their favour not only received the amount under protest but also filed applications for reference to the Land Acquisition Court in terms of Section 18 of the Act pursuant whereto and in furtherance whereof references to the civil Court were made. Admittedly enhanced amount of compensation, as determined by the Land Acquisition Judge, have also been paid.

6. Some of the land owners, however, filed applications for reference although they had not accepted the amount of compensation with protest which was rejected by the Land Acquisition Officer. Some of the awardees filed their applications for making reference after the period prescribed therefore. Those applications were also rejected.

7. It is stated that most of the claim petitions were determined upto 1979. Some of the land owners, however, formed an association SUTNI Sangam {(hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as `the Association') for protecting the legal rights of the agriculturists whose lands were sought to be acquired. A gist of the circular letter directing reference of cases for the purpose of enhancement of compensation reads as under:

POINT I

Awardees who received the compensation amount with protest and submitted their applications requesting a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act after the expiry of the stipulated time.

POINT II

Awardees who received the compensation amount without protest but submitted applications requesting reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

POINT III

Awardees who received the compensation amount without protest but failed to submit applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

8. A clarificatory order, however, was issued by the said authority on or about 5.1.1983 stating that the earlier instructions issued by the Government were not intended to override the provisions of the said Act and they should be meticulously followed and, thus, if a person had accepted the award without protest, he would lose his right to claim any reference in terms of Section 18 of the Act.

9. Respondent Association thereafter filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Madras marked as Writ Petition No. 55144 of 1983 praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs:

...a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to give effect to the instructions of the 2nd Respondent contained in letter No. D.Dis.II/3748/80 dated 21.5.1981 and Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and consequently direct Respondents 4 to 8 to refer the cases of the persons included in Annexures I, II, III and IV herein to a civil Court for grant of enhanced compensation in respect of the lands acquired from them for the purpose of the Salem Steel Project,...

10. In the said writ proceedings, the State Government filed a counter affidavit, inter alia, contending that in mo