1. These two appeals are preferred against the order dated 10.11.2010 in WP Nos. 1998-2032/2010 passed by the learned Single Judge quashing the impugned notification, in so far as it relates to the lands belonging to the petitioners. Further, he has directed the authorities to restore the possession of the lands to the petitioners and on such restoration, he has directed the petitioners to refund the award amount drawn by them simultaneously.

2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they were referred in the writ petitions.

3. The petitioners are the owners of land. Survey numbers, extent and village where the lands are situated are clearly set out in para 1 of the writ petition. The writ petition is filed on 21.01.2010 seeking quashing of the notification dated 04.01.1985 under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short), the final notification dated 25.09.1986 under Section 6 (1) of the Act, the awards dated 28.01.1989 and 31.01.1989 and the notification issued on 12/15.04.1991 and 4/5.11.1992 under Section 16(2) of the Act.

4. The case of the petitioners is that, at the instance of the 4th respondent-Society, the State Government initiated the acquisition proceedings to acquire the lands of the petitioners. The 4th respondent-Society is not a genuine one. There was collusion between the 4th respondent-Society and the Government Authorities in initiating the proceedings under the provision of the Act. The intention of the 4th respondent-Society was not to serve either the public or its alleged members, but the only intention was to sell the land in bulk to the land developers and also allot the sites according to their whims and fancies to the persons of their choice. The acquisition does not conform to the requirements of Section 3(f)(vi), 3(e)(iii), 39, 40, 44-A of the Act. There is no public purpose as defined under the Act. The alleged acquisition proceedings were initiated on the basis of the letter dated 21.10.1982 written by the 4th respondent-Society to the then Honourable Chief Minister of Karnataka. The State Government accorded sanction under the normal rules to initiate land acquisition proceedings in favour of the 4th respondent-Society to an extent of 171.37 acres which is impermissible under the Act. Since, the 4th respondent-Society is a Co-operative Society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, the provision of Section 3(e) (iii) of the Act are attracted. The State Government has to sanction by invoking the provisions of Chapter VII or Part VII of the Act to initiate acquisition proceedings of the Society. Compliance of the requirement of the Section 40 and 41 are mandatory. Therefore, entire acquisition proceedings initiated by the State Government under normal rules in favour of 4th respondent-Society is vitiated, illegal and void, ab-initio.

5. The 4th respondent-Society requested the Government to accord permission for 66.05 acres of land. But strangely, the State Government accorded sanction for 171.37 acres of land. The Government proposed to acquire the land to an extent of 280 acres without any solid scheme or proper plan. These facts clearly show how the authorities have manipulated the acquisition proceedings at every stage in order to help the 4th respondent-Society. There is no prior approval of the scheme by the State Government, which is a condition precedent and mandatory. Therefore, the entire acquisition proceedings is not justified and the same is a malafide one. Inspite of the same, 4(1) notification came to be issued which is wholly illegal, arbitrary and cannot be sustained. No enquiry as contemplated under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted. The petitioners had no opportunity to file their objections. They were not heard by the authorities.

6. The 4th respondent-Society has entered into an agreement/understanding with some private entities (middlemen) for acquisition of lands. M/s. Vellal