1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in all these cases, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order.

2. Petitioners are the allottees of different sites from the Bangalore Development Authority, the second respondent herein at J.P. Nagar 8th Stage Layout, Bangalore. BDA has executed the sale deeds in respect of the sites allotted in their favour on different dates. Pursuant to the execution of the sale deeds, katha of the property has been transferred to their names by the BDA and that they have been paying taxes. It is the case of the petitioners that certain structures were coming up on their sites. On verification, they came to know that the State Government has issued a notification under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('LA Act' for short) dated 8.6.2010 bearing No.UDD/321/MNX/2010 de-notifying the land to an extent of 33 guntas in Sy.No.24 of Kothanur Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore. They also came to know that the sites in question were carved out of the aforesaid survey number. That is why they have filed these writ petitions challenging the validity of the said notification.

3. BDA has filed its objections in W.P.No.38745/2010 contending that the notification under Section 17(5) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 ('BDA Act' for short) was issued on 23.8.1988 proposing to acquire the land in question along with various other lands for the formation of J.P. Nagar 8th Stage Layout. This was followed by a declaration, which was issued on 19.10.1984. Award was passed on 20.9.1985 and possession of the land was taken on 3.2.1996. Thereafter, land was transferred by the State Government to the BDA for formation of the layout. BDA has formed the layout and sites have been allotted to the petitioners herein and others in the survey number in question.

4. Annapoorna Education Trust ('Trust' for short), which is impleaded as the third respondent in W.P.Nos.30684/2011, 30685/2011, 7502/2011, 30683/2011, 30687/2011 and as the fourth respondent in W.P.No.38745/2010 has filed its statement of objections in W.P.No.38745/2010 contending that T.V. Mohan and V. Radha, the Trustees of the Education Trust have purchased different portions of land in Sy.No.24 for establishing an Educational Institution from T. Meenakshi. Thereafter, the Trust made an application to the State Government for withdrawal of the land from acquisition. Considering the request of the Trust, the State Government has withdrawn the lands measuring 33 guntas in Sy.No.24 from acquisition. The Trust has put up construction and has been running the school in the said building.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that after taking possession of the land under Section 16 of the LA Act, the State Government has no power to withdraw the said land from acquisition. It is argued that after acquisition of the land by the State Government, the same has been transferred to the BDA under Section 36 of the BDA Act for formation of the layout. BDA has formed the layout and has allotted the sites to the general public including the petitioners. Therefore, the State Government could not have issued a notification under Section 48 of the Act in respect of the property in question. It is argued that the Trustees of the fourth respondent have admittedly purchased the property after issuance of the notifications for acquisition of the land. The notified kathedar of the said property was Smt. T. Meenakshi. Therefore, the sale deed executed by T. Meenakshi in favour of the Trustees itself is void as it has been executed after the issuance of the preliminary and the final notifications. At best, the subsequent purchasers can claim compensation. Therefore, question of issuing a notification under Section 48 at the behest of the subsequent purchaser is illegal.

6. Learned Counsel for the respondent-BDA submits that after the vesting of the lands with the State Government